Question of Yocto dunfell LTS period

Question of Yocto dunfell LTS period

[Chanho Park]

Dear folks,

I found the lts period of Yocto dunfell has been extended from 2022.04 to
2024.04[1].
AFAIK, a Yocto LTS version has 2 years period. I tried to find any notice
regarding this but I just found Richard's e-mail[2] in last year.
Can I find any thread or notice regarding this extension?

[1]: https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Releases
[2]:
https://lore.kernel.org/yocto/3878e27fb895718b8c5d65f444fea443a56e0587.camel
@linuxfoundation.org/

Best Regards,
Chanho Park

Re: [OE-core] Question of Yocto dunfell LTS period

[Jate Sujjavanich]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1745 bytes --]

I received the answer to this question in IRC on 10/29/2021.

16:06 <https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/yocto/2021-10-29#31083490> <
jatedev> I saw a wiki edit that said dunfell's LTS period is now through
April 2024, but I've seen no announcements. Any truth to this rumor?
16:20 <https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/yocto/2021-10-29#31083555> <
smurray> jatedev: it was announced on one of the technical calls a few
weeks back, so yes AFAIK
16:25 <https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/yocto/2021-10-29#31083577> <RP>
jatedev: definitely true. I wish we could sort out the project advocacy
side of things :(

Let this email serve as a little advocacy.


-Jate S.

On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 8:14 PM Chanho Park via lists.openembedded.org
<chanho61.park=samsung.com@lists.openembedded.org> wrote:

> Dear folks,
>
> I found the lts period of Yocto dunfell has been extended from 2022.04 to
> 2024.04[1].
> AFAIK, a Yocto LTS version has 2 years period. I tried to find any notice
> regarding this but I just found Richard's e-mail[2] in last year.
> Can I find any thread or notice regarding this extension?
>
> [1]: https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Releases
> [2]:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/yocto/3878e27fb895718b8c5d65f444fea443a56e0587.camel
> @linuxfoundation.org/
>
> Best Regards,
> Chanho Park
>
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
> View/Reply Online (#160552):
> https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/160552
> Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/88411698/3616919
> Group Owner: openembedded-core+owner@lists.openembedded.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [
> jatedev@gmail.com]
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4744 bytes --]

Re: [yocto] [OE-core] Question of Yocto dunfell LTS period

[Michael Opdenacker]

On 1/14/22 2:36 AM, Jate Sujjavanich wrote:
> I received the answer to this question in IRC on 10/29/2021.
>
> 16:06
> <https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/yocto/2021-10-29#31083490> <jatedev>
> I saw a wiki edit that said dunfell's LTS period is now through April
> 2024, but I've seen no announcements. Any truth to this rumor? 
> 16:20
> <https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/yocto/2021-10-29#31083555> <smurray>
> jatedev: it was announced on one of the technical calls a few weeks
> back, so yes AFAIK 
> 16:25
> <https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/yocto/2021-10-29#31083577> <RP>
> jatedev: definitely true. I wish we could sort out the project
> advocacy side of things :( 
>
> Let this email serve as a little advocacy.


I believe this would also help if the website (releases page) and/or
official documentation carried such information.
Thanks for raising this concern!
Cheers
Michael.

-- 
Michael Opdenacker, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

Re: [yocto] [OE-core] Question of Yocto dunfell LTS period

[Alexander Kanavin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1859 bytes --]

Actually, I think this was some kind of missed PR opportunity. Regular
distros, such as RHEL, Debian and everyone else, are constantly trotting
out their support windows as the reason to hand them the job of making
products, so we could counter that better perhaps.

Alex

On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 at 06:28, Michael Opdenacker <
michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com> wrote:

>
> On 1/14/22 2:36 AM, Jate Sujjavanich wrote:
> > I received the answer to this question in IRC on 10/29/2021.
> >
> > 16:06
> > <https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/yocto/2021-10-29#31083490
> > <jatedev>
> > I saw a wiki edit that said dunfell's LTS period is now through April
> > 2024, but I've seen no announcements. Any truth to this rumor?
> > 16:20
> > <https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/yocto/2021-10-29#31083555
> > <smurray>
> > jatedev: it was announced on one of the technical calls a few weeks
> > back, so yes AFAIK
> > 16:25
> > <https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/yocto/2021-10-29#31083577> <RP>
> > jatedev: definitely true. I wish we could sort out the project
> > advocacy side of things :(
> >
> > Let this email serve as a little advocacy.
>
>
> I believe this would also help if the website (releases page) and/or
> official documentation carried such information.
> Thanks for raising this concern!
> Cheers
> Michael.
>
> --
> Michael Opdenacker, Bootlin
> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> https://bootlin.com
>
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
> View/Reply Online (#160557):
> https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/160557
> Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/88415300/1686489
> Group Owner: openembedded-core+owner@lists.openembedded.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [
> alex.kanavin@gmail.com]
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3261 bytes --]

Re: [yocto] [OE-core] Question of Yocto dunfell LTS period

[Zoltan Boszormenyi]

Funny you mention PR.

It would also help if recipes staying on the same version
but adding patches for e.g. CVE fixes should increase their
PR value so their rebuilt versions can be put into a package repo.

Throwing away the buildroot (as suggested any time some obscure
build error happens) and restarting a complete image build
resets the autopr value so the repo would contain packages with
the same r0.0 release string and the package manager doesn't know
that the package is newer.

2022. 01. 14. 10:42 keltezéssel, Alexander Kanavin írta:
> Actually, I think this was some kind of missed PR opportunity. Regular distros, such as 
> RHEL, Debian and everyone else, are constantly trotting out their support windows as the 
> reason to hand them the job of making products, so we could counter that better perhaps.
> 
> Alex
> 
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 at 06:28, Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com 
> <mailto:michael.opdenacker@bootlin.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
>     On 1/14/22 2:36 AM, Jate Sujjavanich wrote:
>      > I received the answer to this question in IRC on 10/29/2021.
>      >
>      > 16:06
>      > <https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/yocto/2021-10-29#31083490
>     <https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/yocto/2021-10-29#31083490>> <jatedev>
>      > I saw a wiki edit that said dunfell's LTS period is now through April
>      > 2024, but I've seen no announcements. Any truth to this rumor?
>      > 16:20
>      > <https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/yocto/2021-10-29#31083555
>     <https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/yocto/2021-10-29#31083555>> <smurray>
>      > jatedev: it was announced on one of the technical calls a few weeks
>      > back, so yes AFAIK
>      > 16:25
>      > <https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/yocto/2021-10-29#31083577
>     <https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/yocto/2021-10-29#31083577>> <RP>
>      > jatedev: definitely true. I wish we could sort out the project
>      > advocacy side of things :(
>      >
>      > Let this email serve as a little advocacy.
> 
> 
>     I believe this would also help if the website (releases page) and/or
>     official documentation carried such information.
>     Thanks for raising this concern!
>     Cheers
>     Michael.
> 
>     -- 
>     Michael Opdenacker, Bootlin
>     Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
>     https://bootlin.com <https://bootlin.com>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [yocto] [OE-core] Question of Yocto dunfell LTS period

[Ross Burton]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 at 12:41, Zoltan Boszormenyi via
lists.yoctoproject.org <zboszor=pr.hu@lists.yoctoproject.org> wrote:
> It would also help if recipes staying on the same version
> but adding patches for e.g. CVE fixes should increase their
> PR value so their rebuilt versions can be put into a package repo.
>
> Throwing away the buildroot (as suggested any time some obscure
> build error happens) and restarting a complete image build
> resets the autopr value so the repo would contain packages with
> the same r0.0 release string and the package manager doesn't know
> that the package is newer.

If you want persistent PRs between builds after deleting the build
tree, simply archive the PR database.

We're not going back to manually updating the PR on changes.

Ross

AW: [yocto] Question of Yocto dunfell LTS period

[Matthias Klein]

Hello together,

I would like to add a question to the topic:

Why was the LTS period for dunfell extended?
Can we expect the same for kirstone?

Many greetings,
Matthias

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org <yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org> Im Auftrag von Chanho Park via lists.yoctoproject.org
Gesendet: Freitag, 14. Januar 2022 02:14
An: yocto@lists.yoctoproject.org; openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Cc: richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org; steve@sakoman.com
Betreff: [yocto] Question of Yocto dunfell LTS period

Dear folks,

I found the lts period of Yocto dunfell has been extended from 2022.04 to 2024.04[1].
AFAIK, a Yocto LTS version has 2 years period. I tried to find any notice regarding this but I just found Richard's e-mail[2] in last year.
Can I find any thread or notice regarding this extension?

[1]: https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Releases
[2]:
https://lore.kernel.org/yocto/3878e27fb895718b8c5d65f444fea443a56e0587.camel
@linuxfoundation.org/

Best Regards,
Chanho Park

Re: AW: [yocto] Question of Yocto dunfell LTS period

[Richard Purdie]

On Fri, 2022-01-14 at 07:14 +0000, Matthias Klein wrote:
> Hello together,
> 
> I would like to add a question to the topic:
> 
> Why was the LTS period for dunfell extended?
> Can we expect the same for kirstone?

The project members agreed to fun an extension to the lifetime of dunfell from 2
years to 4 years. There should have been some announcements about this but we
lack people on the advocacy side of the project with time to make that happen.
That saddens me a lot and I think it is a missed opportunity but there isn't
much I can do about it beyond what I've already tried.

Extending Dunfell is an experiment so we would base a decision on how well the
dunfell extension is working out. Extending an LTS like this requires a
financial commitment from the project. At this point in time the project cannot
commit to extending kirkstone as we can't guarantee the finances. 

Cheers,

Richard