Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On 07/08, Sandro Bonazzola wrote:
while dropping fc20 builds from master as announced 2 weeks ago I've s=
that several packages implying ovirt-engine availability on fc21 were
still built on jenkins also if we dropped fc21 support for 3.6 in
Since there's no commitment from integration team and from infrastructure=
CI team to support FC21 I would have liked to drop them.
I've been stopped doing that since it seems there are developers
21 as development environment.
I'd like to understand why.
I would have understood having developers stuck on fedora 20 for supporti=
and I totally understand developers already on fedora 22.
But being fedora 21 the only unsupported version I don't see any
son for keep wasting CI resources on such distribution.
Is there any serious motivation for keeping fedora 21 engine related buil=
I may understand keeping vdsm related builds since vdsm is supposed
rk on fc21 also for 3.5 so i've no objection in keeping vdsm and its deps
fc21 as long as vdsm team supports it.
Totally agree, that will also allow us to remove all the fc21 slaves and
replace them with fc22 or el7/el6.
There are though a few projecs that still use fc21, but luckilly they use m=
already and don't care much of what system has installed.
Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at redhat.com
Infra mailing list
Red Hat S.L.
Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D
Tel.: +420 532 294 605
RHT Global #: 82-62605
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----