> On 4. Jul 2018, at 22:51, Joan Touzet <woh...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> DISCLAIMER: This is a non-technical proposal to make a project decision.
> Per our Bylaws[1], this means that it should "normally be made with lazy
> consensus, or by the entire community using discussion-led
> consensus-building, and not through formal voting." However, since the
> intent is to make a significant policy change, this concrete proposal
> should be considered as a *lazy consensus* decision with a *7 day*
> timeframe (expiring on or about 2017-07-11, 23:59 UTC. Please give this
> thread your ample consideration.
>
>
> I would like to table[2] a proposal to terminate official Apache support
> for CouchDB 1.x. This means that:
>
> 1. The Apache CouchDB project will no longer make new 1.x releases.
> 2. All remaining 1.x issues in JIRA and GH Issues will be closed.
> 3. Everyone can continue to use 1.x as long as they want.
> 4. People are welcome to continue discussing 1.x on the users@ list.
>
>
> The reason is simple: no one is maintaining the 1.x.x branches of
> CouchDB anymore. Issues stack up on the tracker[3] with no response.
> Original grand plans of back-porting 2.x features such as Mango to 1.x
> have not materialised. And when important security issues surface[4],
> having to patch 1.x as well as 2.x slows down the security team's
> ability to push releases quickly out the door.
>
> By focusing on what we do best - supporting 2.x and beyond with bug
> fixes, new features, and ever-improving documentation and web UI - we
> can improve our release cadence and avoid misleading our user base
> with false promises.
>
>
> THAT SAID: There are two important footnotes to the proposal.
>
> FIRST: If a group of interested maintainers start making active efforts
> to improve 1.x branch upkeep, I can speak with the full authority of the
> PMC to say that we'll endorse those efforts. But to un-mothball
> 1.x officially should require more than 1-2 people doing occasional
> bugfixing work. I'd personally want to see at least a 3-person team
> making sustained contributions to 1.x before re-activating official
> releases. Also, that work would need to be in-line with work currently
> happening on master; I wouldn't want to see new 1.x features materialise
> that don't have parallel commits to master. (Much preferred would be to
> see people fixing the things in 2.x that prevent people migrating off
> of 1.x instead.)
>
> SECOND: Let a thousand forks bloom. If you're looking to build a CouchDB
> 1.x fork that has baked in geo/full text search, Mango, Fauxton, and
> can run on VMS, OS/2 Warp 4, NeXTStep 3.x, and Palm, have at it. I'll
> even write a blog post about your project. (Sounds interesting!)
>
>
> Again, this proposal defaults to lazy consensus with a 7-day expiry
> period. CouchDB committers have binding "votes" on this proposal.
+1
Best
Jan
—
>
> Thanks for your consideration,
> Joan "to infinity, and beyond" Touzet
>
>
> [1] http://couchdb.apache.org/bylaws.html#decisions
> [2] In the non-U.S. sense of the word, i.e., meaning to begin
> consideration of a proposal.
> [3] https://s.apache.org/couchdb-1.x-issues
> [4] https://s.apache.org/wdnW
--
Professional Support for Apache CouchDB:
https://neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/
