Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 29

Thread: openSUSE Leap 42.3 for Evergreen?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Kamloops, BC, Canada
    Posts
    3,974

    Default Re: openSUSE Leap 42.3 for Evergreen?

    Quote Originally Posted by flymail View Post
    I stand corrected: openSUSE Leap users are forced to perform release updates every 8-12 months.
    Sorry, but nobody is forcing anyone to update Leap at any time.

    So, quit spouting a falsehood.

    Instead, they are being offered the opportunity to get improved versions -- and supported fixes -- if they so desire.

    Anyone can continue using an older version of openSUSE as long as they wish. We do not travel around with weapons and point them at people's heads to force them to update.

    ... mostly, because the travel would break our bank accounts.
    Last edited by Fraser_Bell; 08-Jul-2018 at 14:14.
    -Gerry Makaro
    Fraser-Bell Info Tech
    Solving Tech Mysteries since the Olden Days!
    ~~
    If I helped you, consider clicking the Star at the bottom left of my post.

  2. #12

    Default Re: openSUSE Leap 42.3 for Evergreen?

    On 2018-07-08, Fraser Bell <Fraser_Bell@no-mx.forums.microfocus.com> wrote:
    >
    > flymail;2872841 Wrote:
    >> I stand corrected: openSUSE Leap users are -*forced*- to
    >> perform release updates every 8-12 months.

    >
    > Sorry, but nobody is forcing anyone to update Leap at any time.


    Seriously? You are suggesting that imposing an EOL beyond which security updates and maintenance fixes are not longer
    provided does not constitute a way of forcing responsible users to update? It's impressive the way the openSUSE forum
    comradery are able to close ranks, and culminate in a force to reckon with. However I have neither the time, energy, nor
    desire to do so, and therefore regret ever proposing my suggestion albeit with the best of intentions.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Groningen, Netherlands
    Posts
    19,642
    Blog Entries
    14

    Default Re: openSUSE Leap 42.3 for Evergreen?

    OK, let's cool down a bit. I was a bit harsh, sorry for that.

    But the reason Evergreen was dropped, is that the way Leap is built and released, upgrading to the future 15.x releases is by no means what 11.x -> 11.x+1 and so on were. They're more like service pack. No major software upgrades f.e. That makes Leap 15 incl it's .x releases have a lifetime like Evergreen had. That model was used for the 42.x releases too.
    Another issue to have no Evergreen releases next to the Leap #.x releases, is that it's an aweful lot of work to keep something alive in a world where changes are a daily phenomenon.
    ° Appreciate my reply? Click the star and let me know why.

    ° Perfection is not gonna happen. No way.

    https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Board#Members
    http://en.opensuse.org/User:Knurpht
    http://nl.opensuse.org/Gebruiker:Knurpht

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Kamloops, BC, Canada
    Posts
    3,974

    Default Re: openSUSE Leap 42.3 for Evergreen?

    Quote Originally Posted by flymail View Post
    On 2018-07-08, Fraser Bell <Fraser_Bell@no-mx.forums.microfocus.com> wrote:
    >
    > flymail;2872841 Wrote:
    >> I stand corrected: openSUSE Leap users are -*forced*- to
    >> perform release updates every 8-12 months.

    >
    > Sorry, but nobody is forcing anyone to update Leap at any time.


    Seriously? You are suggesting that imposing an EOL beyond which security updates and maintenance fixes are not longer
    provided does not constitute a way of forcing responsible users to update? It's impressive the way the openSUSE forum
    comradery are able to close ranks, and culminate in a force to reckon with. However I have neither the time, energy, nor
    desire to do so, and therefore regret ever proposing my suggestion albeit with the best of intentions.
    Granted, some responses you got were a little over the line, IMHO, but coming to this conclusion is just getting silly.

    As for your suggestion about an "Evergreen" version, one of the main reasons, if not the primary reason, is that there is nobody willing to do the enormous amount of work that would take. It needs more than one person (a team, actually), plus it needs hardware resources to accomplish.

    As for the team for creation and continuing maintenance of such a thing, I see people asking now & then, but none of them -- including you -- have offered to step up and do the work.

    ... and that, my friend, is the bottom line of why there is none.
    Last edited by Fraser_Bell; 08-Jul-2018 at 14:51. Reason: typo
    -Gerry Makaro
    Fraser-Bell Info Tech
    Solving Tech Mysteries since the Olden Days!
    ~~
    If I helped you, consider clicking the Star at the bottom left of my post.

  5. #15

    Default Re: openSUSE Leap 42.3 for Evergreen?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fraser_Bell View Post
    Granted, some responses you got were a little over the line, IMHO, <SNIP>
    Quote Originally Posted by Knurpht View Post
    OK, let's cool down a bit. I was a bit harsh, sorry for that.
    No worries. Upon rereading my posts, I hope you'd agree I kept my cool... perhaps a little too ice-cool. Unfortunately, there's no mechanism to moderate the moderators!

    Quote Originally Posted by Fraser_Bell View Post
    As for your suggestion about an "Evergreen" version, one of the main reasons, if not the primary reason, is that there is nobody willing to do the enormous amount of work that would take. It needs more than one person (a team, actually), plus it needs hardware resources to accomplish.
    I believe you. As RBrownSUSE has said, if such a level of support is not provided for paying SUSE users, then it cannot be expected for openSUSE users.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fraser_Bell View Post
    As for the team for creation and continuing maintenance of such a thing, I see people asking now & then, but none of them -- including you -- have offered to step up and do the work.
    Maintaining packages is somewhat outside my brief. I'm an AI scientist, not a developer!

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Kamloops, BC, Canada
    Posts
    3,974

    Default Re: openSUSE Leap 42.3 for Evergreen?

    Quote Originally Posted by flymail View Post
    Maintaining packages is somewhat outside my brief. I'm an AI scientist, not a developer!
    Yes, for some of us, becoming a developer is a huge mountain to climb, indeed.
    -Gerry Makaro
    Fraser-Bell Info Tech
    Solving Tech Mysteries since the Olden Days!
    ~~
    If I helped you, consider clicking the Star at the bottom left of my post.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Kamloops, BC, Canada
    Posts
    3,974

    Default Re: openSUSE Leap 42.3 for Evergreen?

    Quote Originally Posted by flymail View Post
    Unfortunately, there's no mechanism to moderate the moderators!
    Actually, we do this, as well. However, in some instances, we move a little slower and with more caution.

    ... though we tend to try to use caution in all instances with all users, which is why we work and co-ordinate as a team.

    Because it is a team, we sometimes (actually, most often) wait until we receive responses from the rest of the Moderator team with their views before we act.

    We try not to act too hastily, and we try desperately NOT to over-react. However, we too -- believe it or not -- are only human, and some of the OTHER MEMBERS of the Moderators' Team occasionally make mistakes.

    ... Okay, doggonenationit, I make some mistakes, too.
    Last edited by Fraser_Bell; 09-Jul-2018 at 14:53. Reason: Remove mild Expletive: Will not ban Fraser_Bell at this point. :-)
    -Gerry Makaro
    Fraser-Bell Info Tech
    Solving Tech Mysteries since the Olden Days!
    ~~
    If I helped you, consider clicking the Star at the bottom left of my post.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    San Diego, Ca, USA
    Posts
    10,916
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: openSUSE Leap 42.3 for Evergreen?

    IMO
    When Provisioners consider a distro for long term, Production use, they generally expect a 3 year window before a forced upgrade.

    Technically,
    I'm pretty sure that should mean that machines should run updates regularly for self-maintenance and minimal supervision for 3 years.

    Based on the above,
    Without reading various blogs and what-not, it was my personal assumption that releases such as 42.1, 42.2 and 42.3 should be considered major releases since you really had to "dup" from one to the next to maintain support.

    But,
    Recently in another thread I was disabused of my assumption that 42.1, 42.2 and 42.3 were major releases...
    No, "42" is the major version and 42.1, 42.2 and 42.3 were each to be considered minor releases within the "42" major release cycle.

    I can accept that definition from a technical point of view because it's easy to see that the core was relatively stable and unchanged through the entire "42" cycle, and it might even be possible to upgrade from openSUSE 13.2 to any of the "42" releases without too much risk (although to be perfectly safe, I'd always recommend what is in the SDB which is not to skip <any> release).

    Still though,
    As I've described... How openSUSE now defines its life cycle does not seem to be 100% consistent with what Purchasing and Zero-Touch SysAdmins expect.
    Is it still OK that a "distro upgrade" is required every year plus?
    Maybe.
    Today I'm not in charge of any machines that have to run 3 years with little to no attention, even when I deploy a very large farm or cluster, it's done for specific purpose for a specified amount of time and then destroyed (that's why I use virtualization).
    I might feel differently if my requirements were more "Long Term Production"

    IMO,
    TSU
    Beginner Wiki Quickstart - https://en.opensuse.org/User:Tsu2/Quickstart_Wiki
    Solved a problem recently? Create a wiki page for future personal reference!
    Learn something new?
    Attended a computing event?
    Post and Share!

  9. #19

    Default Re: openSUSE Leap 42.3 for Evergreen?

    As always, Tsu makes some very valid and relevant points.

    On 2018-07-13, tsu2 <tsu2@no-mx.forums.microfocus.com> wrote:
    > But,
    > Recently in another thread I was disabused of my assumption that 42.1,
    > 42.2 and 42.3 were major releases...
    > No, "42" is the major version and 42.1, 42.2 and 42.3 were each to be
    > considered minor releases within the "42" major release cycle.


    I agree that a three-year support major-release model is consistent with the perception of 42.1, 42.2, and 42.3 as
    minor releases.

    > I can accept that definition from a technical point of view because it's
    > easy to see that the core was relatively stable and unchanged through
    > the entire "42" cycle, and it might even be possible to upgrade from
    > openSUSE 13.2 to any of the "42" releases without too much risk
    > (although to be perfectly safe, I'd always recommend what is in the SDB
    > which is not to skip <any> release).


    On simple systems with straightforward software package installations, I believe incremental openSUSE minor or major
    release updates are very reliable so long as no release version is skipped. However, this reliability is cannot be
    guaranteed on complex custom installations that include many third party packages - in such cases it is often more
    time-efficient simply to reinstall rather than attempt an upgrade especially for system admins that have scripted the
    entire installation process. For this reason it could be argued that the support time for openSUSE Leap is in reality
    defined by its minor release cycle period rather than the major release cycle period.

    > Is it still OK that a "distro upgrade" is required every year plus?
    > Maybe.


    I think it is OK, but it necessitates having to have a fallback GNU/Linux installation at hand, since the performance
    cost of BTRFS not acceptable for some.

    > Today I'm not in charge of any machines that have to run 3 years with
    > little to no attention, even when I deploy a very large farm or cluster,
    > it's done for specific purpose for a specified amount of time and then
    > destroyed (that's why I use virtualization).
    > I might feel differently if my requirements were more "Long Term
    > Production"


    Picture yourself as a system administrator on 1st May 2018: you have just acquired a new cluster and want to install
    GNU/Linux. You look at openSUSE Leap and find that the latest release is 42.3 with an EOL of 31st January 2019. What do
    you do? If you install Leap 42.3, you're good for only 9 months, and some might find that unacceptable.

    The problem is that the overlap of support time between major releases (i.e. 42 to 15) is identical to that of minor
    releases (42.3 to 15.0). It could therefore be argued that distinction of major and minor releases as a way of claiming
    a three-year support cycle is contrived and disingenuous. In this thread I proposed a workaround by extending support
    for the final minor release according to the openSUSE Evergreen model. However, following the frankly hostile reaction
    of senior members of the openSUSE community to my suggestion, I am reluctant to propose alternative solutions.


  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Auckland, NZ
    Posts
    20,163
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: openSUSE Leap 42.3 for Evergreen?

    Picture yourself as a system administrator on 1st May 2018: you have just acquired a new cluster and want to install
    GNU/Linux. You look at openSUSE Leap and find that the latest release is 42.3 with an EOL of 31st January 2019. What do
    you do? If you install Leap 42.3, you're good for only 9 months, and some might find that unacceptable.
    Perhaps choose paid-for support with SLES instead?

    In this thread I proposed a workaround by extending support
    for the final minor release according to the openSUSE Evergreen model. However, following the frankly hostile reaction
    of senior members of the openSUSE community to my suggestion, I am reluctant to propose alternative solutions.
    You can propose what you like - those that are involved with the development/support of the project ultimately get to make the decisions, and the move to the current model had buy-in from the majority of the community. There will always be pros and cons that may work for or against some use cases I guess.
    Last edited by deano_ferrari; 25-Jul-2018 at 01:55.
    openSUSE Leap 15.0; KDE Plasma 5

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •