See ADR-000003 - Morning Glory support period
Previous Notes:
- Julian Ladisch : see background/context for the motivation.
- Zak Burke : we should have an ADR for designated and LTS, but not one for Morning Glory in particular. Jeremy Huff , Radhakrishnan Gopalakrishnan , Mark Veksler : agree
- Radhakrishnan Gopalakrishnan : this amounts to a support policy; Tod Olson : yeah, and also intersects with support policy recommendation that has been made; does the TC really get to make this decision for MG?
- Mark Veksler : also looking for guidance from security group about when to do/not do security investigations ; LTS designation should be done by PC, not TC; there are cost implications. Guidance from PC was to revisit this in late 2022.
- Julian Ladisch : security fixes need to be evaluated for criticality and how long they should be backported. Want a decision WRT how far back security issues should be backported?
- Mark Veksler we don't have an LTS now, but have "current and previous" guidance and should stick to that for now.
- Owen Stephens fixing security updates to a flower release, vs to the release of the component itself (stripes, raml, spring) seems awkward.
- Craig McNally : Put this to a vote next week?
- Ingolf Kuss : what feedback are you looking for from sysops? Julian Ladisch endorsement, which can come via lazy consensus
- Craig McNally but is this our decision or the PC's? Marc Johnson but it's landed in our court for now. All: let's briefly discuss moving it forward next week.
- Jeremy Huff : if not deciding about MG specifically, TC certainly can/should be involved in the general criteria for LTS designation.
- Jeremy Huff Which versions are LTS should be decided by the PC and how we handle LTS should be handled by the TC
- Marc Johnson The individuals who originated the proposal should put together a cross council group to address this
- Zak Burke We should not make a decision that is specific to morning glory, but a general decision about LTS support
- Julian Ladisch The LTS topic will take longer to discuss, this ADR was intended to get a quicker decision for morning glory
- Zak Burke A longer and more generalizable discussion now will save us time in the future
- Marc Johnson Agrees that we should have a policy concerning security back ports, but this may be something which should be managed by the POs (Oleksii Petrenko) and not the security group.
- Tod Olson Whoever drives this forward should get in touch with those who wrote the LTS recommendation.
- Craig McNally asked Julian Ladisch if he would want to drive cross council discussion on LTS. Julian Ladisch said yes.
- Later in slack from Marc Johnson :
This is the process that I was referring to at the end of the TC - Morning Glory (R2 2022) PO Bugfix and Hotfix Release Process: It is defined by the PC, Capacity Planning group, product owners and Release Manager for each flower release and describes how decisions are made about what is and is not fixed during the lifecycle of a flower release.
Good morning @here and I'm sorry I missed the last PC meeting due to illness. I am catching up in the notes and would like to clarify regarding the Long Term Release recommendations. The PC did endorse the work of the working group and that is documentation on the wiki here in the decisions log, which also provides a link to the original minutes from our discussion in January. It appears that our communications of that endorsement did not get out to across the project, so perhaps after making a decision, the PC should announce decisions to the other councils? If the Security Team from Tech Council would like to talk to me as part of that original group, I'm available.