On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 9:16 AM, David Smiley <david.w.smi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 9:06 AM Shawn Heisey <apa...@elyograg.org> wrote: > >> > To me the best trade-off is to stop doing 6.x minor releases once 7.0 >> > is out. >> >> I did say it would be relatively safe to do bugfixes and backport >> self-contained features in 6.x after 7.0 comes out as long as care is >> taken to not change the index format or analysis component behavior. >> >> Despite saying that, I actually agree with you that new minor releases >> (and therefore new features) should be avoided in the previous major >> version unless there is a VERY compelling reason. It doesn't seem very >> likely that a compelling reason will be encountered. >> > > Why? If someone (not you, obviously), is willing to be the RM, then > what's it to you? > It's more than just an RM volunteer to do another 6.x feature release; it's also our collective effort to back-port features to 6.x, to spend limited CI resources running 6.x tests, etc. I think there's nothing wrong with a 6.whatever release following a 7.0. > I don't think that makes much sense. Why would we choose to have two major feature branches developed at once? Once 7.0 is out, we should work hard towards the next (7.1) feature release, and leave 6.6.x open only for bug fixes. Mike McCandless http://blog.mikemccandless.com
