[yocto] RFC: Yocto LTS?

[Bruce Ashfield]

On 15-10-14 11:12 AM, Chris Simmonds wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 14/10/15 14:50, akuster808 wrote:
>> Chris,
>>
>>
>> On 10/14/2015 06:28 AM, Chris Simmonds wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Is there a statement about the period of support for a Yocto release?
>>> Looking through the updates, it seems that 12 months is typical, a was
>>> the case for 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6 for example, but I cannot see a
>>> declaration anywhere that this is the expected norm.
>>
>> There is a release every 6 months.
>>
>> https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/FAQ#What_is_the_release_cycle_of_the_Yocto_Project.3F
>>
>>>
>>> Leading on from that, is 12 months enough? Most projects have a
>>> lifecycle that is much longer. Is there an argument for an LTS Yocto
>>> release, maybe once a year? If not, what is the recommended way for a
>>> project developer to keep a distribution up to date in the light of the
>>> several well-publicised security flaws that have been discovered over
>>> the last year or so and the new ones that will no doubt be discovered in
>>> the future?
>>
>> At table of the current supported release can be found at
>> https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Stable_branch_maintenance
>>
>> - Armin
>>
>
> Thanks, Armin, that is the kind of thing I was looking for. It doesn't
> mention a timespan for updates, but there does seem to be an implicit
> maintenance period of 12 months after release. I am still worried that
> this is a rather short period of time, though, and encourages device
> manufacturers to avoid ever updating boxes in the field.

For longer term support, or for support of truly critical devices, the
Yocto project has relied on OSVs to offer commercial support for their
Yocto compatible distributions.

For the project itself, and the projects under the umbrella, the
developer capacity to maintain and support a release for longer than a
year simply doesn't exist. And that lack of cycles is only from the
point of view of duration, much less to offer something that looks
like a SLA on critical issues.

Cheers,

Bruce




>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Chris Simmonds
>>>
>>
>