On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:34 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/11/2011 1:47 PM, André Malo wrote: >> >> * William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: >> >>> Stealing a plan executed by Colm for 1.3, I'd like to propose that >>> we set a two week window following committers' return-from-ApacheCon >>> to execute any backports "of general interest" and apply important >>> fixes/backports to pregsub allocation and non-absolute uri parsing. >>> >>> On approval of this plan, I would offer to introduce the EOL notices >>> (as we ultimately committed to 1.3), tag and roll 2.0.65 on Nov 26th >>> and we would potentially approve and release 2.0 'final' this month. >> >> I'd prefer a "security only from now on" announcement / warning first, and >> keep it that way about another year or so. I don't think the users of 2.0 >> are actually prepared for a statement like "support is gone now, effective >> immediately". >> >> We can put a statement into the docs similar to 1.3 (this time >> automated...) > > So isn't it enough to say that "The project will choose to publish > further releases only for significant security fixes, or will choose > instead to publish patches for less significant security fixes for > 12 months from the date of this final release. From December 2012, > no further security patches or releases should be expected for the > 2.0.x release family."? > > More useful here to tweak the message than the plan, no?
https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/ RHEL 4 EOLs production support February 29, 2012. RHEL 4 includes 2.0.52. RHEL 5 includes 2.2.x I don't see why we would continue to support 2.0.x for longer than Redhat's already long support cycles.
