Timing of EOL notices

[Kate Stewart]

On Fri, 2012-05-18 at 10:58 -0500, Jamie Strandboge wrote:
> Hi Kate,
> 
> I took an action item at UDS to discuss with the release team the timing
> of the EOL notices. Because we are currently backporting the kernel (and
> eventually X stack) to earlier releases, the timing of the EOL notice
> has an effect on the support for people running an LTS with backported
> kernel/X packages. Because the security, kernel and desktop teams will
> stop performing security updates past the EOL, it the EOL happens
> earlier than the release day, there can be a gap in support.
> 
> A specific example: 10.10 was EOLd in early April this year. 10.04 LTS
> users with a backported maverick kernel therefore no longer received
> security updates for this kernel after the EOL announcement (naturally),
> but these users did not have a viable upgrade path to maintain security
> support. They couldn't go to 10.10 (it was just made EOL) and 12.04 LTS
> was not released yet. I suggest the EOL announcement go out on the
> Friday or Monday after release such that there is at least a day of
> overlap. This is still within the spirit of 18 months support, even if
> it is actually off be a few days.

How do you feel about it being release + 2 week task?  That will account
for the 25/27 week split,  and still give us the 18 months.  I don't
think the pattern of 10.10 will happen again, so it should be treated as
a once of, rather than systemic problem. 

Challenge is that there are a lot of events to track around the release
going out,  and bringing the new release on line.   Adding the shutting
down and cross checking that needs to happen, risks confusions
occuring.  

Will release+2 weeks to shut down the -18month release work for your
team?

Kate.