I agree with Gary. Jeff
> On Sep 24, 2026, at 2:40 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think we should start by dropping the oldest from maintenance ASAP. > People will likely only update once CVEs start accumating on that > non-manintened release. I'd be OK only supporting the current release. > > Gary > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2026, 04:18 Emmanuel Lécharny <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> We currently have 3 active branches: >> - 2.0.X started in 2008 >> - 2.1.X started in 2019 >> - 2.2.X started in 2022 >> >> It costs a lot to maintain those three branches, especially when it >> comes to backport issues. I have spent a hell of time managing CVE's in >> late spring, with some backport to those old branches. >> >> I'm not sure we want to still maintain them. >> >> OTOH, the downloads stats are quite surprising: >> >> 2.2.X represent 57% of the monthly downloads, 2.1.X 9,82% and 2.0.X 30% >> (and FTR 1.1.X represents 7%(!!) of all the downloads. Quite good for a >> 18 years old defunct version...) >> >> So what do you think? Should we focus on 2.2.X, and tell the world we >> will stop maintaining the two other branches? (we can also offer a grace >> period...) >> >> Thanks! >> >> -- >> ------------------------ >> Emmanuel Lécharny >> [email protected] >> [email protected] >> ------------------------ >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
