[OpenAFS] End of life for Windows 2000?
Phillip Moore
w.phillip.moore@gmail.com
Mon, 22 Nov 2010 09:24:07 -0500
--00163646d6a86752b40495a502cc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I would think for any closed operating system platform, that we should drop
support in sync with the vendor. If Microsoft has stopped supporting W2K,
then this seems like a no-brainer to me. So do we. For open source
operating systems, then the same thing applies, assuming there's a governing
body or community for that particular OS.
Perhaps this is really a question that should be address by the OpenAFS
elders? ( I miss you guys... :-P )
If we don't have a clear policy on determining when to drop a platform, it
costs us dearly, as supporting these "dead" platforms prevents us from
modernizing the environment like this.
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 6:30 PM, Gary Buhrmaster
<gary.buhrmaster@gmail.com>wrote:
> > Windows 2000 is now more than ten years old. If your organization would
> be
> > significantly impacted by removing support for Windows 2000, please let
> us
> > know. My personal opinion is that it is time to declare Windows 2000
> > unsupported.
>
> I would have to look at the official dates, but my recollection
> is that Microsoft ended the last support for W2K earlier this
> year. Any further support required an "extended support"
> (i.e. an expensive) contract. Those organizations for which
> W2K (and OpenAFS for W2K) are absolutely required
> should already be budgeting (and contracting) for expensive
> T&M support. OpenAFS for W2K should be declared dead.
>
> Gary
> _______________________________________________
> OpenAFS-info mailing list
> OpenAFS-info@openafs.org
> https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
>
--00163646d6a86752b40495a502cc
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div><br></div><div>I would think for any closed operating system platform,=
that we should drop support in sync with the vendor. =A0If Microsoft has s=
topped supporting W2K, then this seems like a no-brainer to me. =A0So do we=
. =A0 =A0For open source operating systems, then the same thing applies, as=
suming there's a governing body or community for that particular OS. =
=A0=A0</div>
<div><br></div><div>Perhaps this is really a question that should be addres=
s by the OpenAFS elders? =A0( I miss you guys... :-P )</div><div><br></div>=
<div>If we don't have a clear policy on determining when to drop a plat=
form, it costs us dearly, as supporting these "dead" platforms pr=
events us from modernizing the environment like this.<br>
<br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 6:30 PM, Gary Buhrma=
ster <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:gary.buhrmaster@gmail.com">gar=
y.buhrmaster@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_=
quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1=
ex;">
<div class=3D"im">> Windows 2000 is now more than ten years old.=A0 If y=
our organization would be<br>
> significantly impacted by removing support for Windows 2000, please le=
t us<br>
> know.=A0 My personal opinion is that it is time to declare Windows 200=
0<br>
> unsupported.<br>
<br>
</div>I would have to look at the official dates, but my recollection<br>
is that Microsoft ended the last support for W2K earlier this<br>
year. =A0Any further support required an "extended support"<br>
(i.e. an expensive) contract. =A0Those organizations for which<br>
W2K (and OpenAFS for W2K) are absolutely required<br>
should already be budgeting (and contracting) for expensive<br>
T&M support. =A0OpenAFS for W2K should be declared dead.<br>
<br>
Gary<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
OpenAFS-info mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:OpenAFS-info@openafs.org">OpenAFS-info@openafs.org</a><br=
>
<a href=3D"https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info" target=
=3D"_blank">https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
--00163646d6a86752b40495a502cc--