[RFC] 12.04.5

[Scott Kitterman]

On Friday, February 07, 2014 20:28:55 Stéphane Graber wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 05:24:23PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 08:00:12AM -0800, Leann Ogasawara wrote:
> > > With 12.04.4 having just released, I wanted to propose the idea of
> > > having a
> > > 12.04.5 point release for Precise.
> > > 
> > > As many are aware, recent 12.04.x point releases have shipped with a
> > > newer
> > > kernel and X stack by default for hardware enablement purposes.
> > > 
> > >  Maintainers of these enablement stacks have agreed to support these
> > >  until
> > > 
> > > a Trusty based enablement stack is supported in Precise.  Once a Trusty
> > > enablement stack is supported, all previous enablement stacks would EOL
> > > and
> > > be asked to migrate to the final Trusty based enablement stack which
> > > would
> > > continue to be supported for the remaining life of Precise.
> > > 
> > > Currently, 12.04.4 is our final point release for Precise.  12.04.4
> > > shipped
> > > with a Saucy enablement stack by default.  This Saucy enablement stack
> > > in
> > > Precise will eventually EOL in favor of the Trusty enablement stack. 
> > > Once
> > > that happens, our final point release for Precise will be delivering an
> > > EOL'd enablement stack.  This seems unfortunate and inappropriate.  I
> > > would
> > > like to propose having a 5th point release for Precise which would
> > > deliver
> > > the Trusty enablement stack for Precise.
> > > 
> > > Providing a 12.04.5 point release will add no additional maintenance
> > > burden
> > > upon teams supporting enablement stacks in Precise.  It would require
> > > some
> > > extra effort on part of the Canonical Foundations Team as well as the
> > > Ubuntu Release Team to spin up an additional set of images and testing
> > > coordination etc.  However, I informally discussed this with a few
> > > members
> > > of each of those teams and the tentative agreement was that 12.04.5 was
> > > a
> > > reasonable request which could be accommodated.  Collectively we could
> > > find
> > > no compelling reason to not provide 12.04.5.  We also discussed that a
> > > 12.04.5 release should be optional for the Flavors to participate in.
> > > 
> > >  Additionally, we would want to purposely avoid clashing the 14.04.1 and
> > > 
> > > 12.04.5 release dates and would suggest releasing 14.04.1 first and
> > > 12.04.5
> > > after (exact date TBD).
> > > 
> > > What are other's thoughts here?  Does anyone have a compelling reason
> > > for
> > > not providing a 12.04.5 point release?
> > 
> > For the record, this has the Foundations Team's support as well (we've
> > already discussed the resourcing considerations).  So unless someone knows
> > of a reason why we *shouldn't* go ahead with this, I think the main
> > question here is whether the flavors want to participate.
> 
> Speaking with my Edubuntu flavor lead hat on, we'd be happy to participate.

If there's a 12.04.5, Kubuntu will participate.

Scott K