On 16.09.2011 17:59, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 9/16/2011 12:51 AM, Issac Goldstand wrote: >> IIRC, we talked about making 2.0 EOL when we make the next release, but >> I don't think we ever formalized the decision. >> >> Does anyone have comments for or against announcing 2.0 End-Of-Life at a >> set time (say 3 months) following the release of 2.4? > > Yes, I'd prefer we set a 12 month sunset on 2.0 in conjunction with the > 2.4 release, not 3 months later when nobody is paying attention.
+1, 3 months is a bit quick, 12 months should be OK. Regards, Rainer
