On Mon, 2020-11-02 at 09:15 +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 07:34:47PM -0400, Matt Coleman wrote: > > On Oct 30, 2020, at 11:54 AM, Andrea Bolognani <abologna@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Dropping 2008R2 support is a no-brainer. > > > > > > Can we got further? Our policy[1] for Linux is > > > > > > The project aims to support the most recent major version at all > > > times. Support for the previous major version will be dropped 2 > > > years after the new major version is released or when the vendor > > > itself drops support, whichever comes first. > > > > > > If we adopted the same policy for Windows Server[2], then we could > > > drop support for 2012R2 today and support for 2016 in the next > > > release. > > > > > > Is there a good reason why we should *not* do that? > > > > We need 2012R2 support at Datto, so I'd like to keep it in there for > > the time being. This is for integration with our customers' systems, so > > we don't have control over the OS version. It still accounts for a > > significant portion of our customer base. > > Given that Datto is the only org to make significant contributions to > the HyperV driver in years, I'm fine with us keeping 2012R2. Our support > policy is basically written to suit the needs of the people who are taking > on the maintainership, so its fine to evolve it. > > I simply ask that the docs/platforms.rst and/or drvhyperv.html.in pages > be updated to reflect what we're doing wrt HyperV support. Sounds good to me as well. -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
