+1 on closing out with 3.1.8

Most providers have already moved to 3.2.x. Any providers still on 3.1.x
should chime in on this thread (BlazeGraph
<https://github.com/blazegraph/tinkerpop3/blob/master/pom.xml#L69>,
ChronoGraph
<https://github.com/MartinHaeusler/chronos/blob/master/build.gradle#L75-L76>)
if they need it to keep going.

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 10:19 AM, David Brown <davebs...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Aug 9, 2017 8:23 AM, "Ted Wilmes" <twil...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > That makes good sense to me. I'd be honored to lead it off into the
> sunset.
> >
> > --Ted
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 6:14 AM, Jorge Bay Gondra <
> jorgebaygon...@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 3.1 line is about 2 years old, I think its a lot of time for a
> relatively
> > > new project like TinkerPop.
> > > I'm in favor of making 3.1.8 the last release of the 3.1 branch.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Stephen Mallette <
> spmalle...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > We have taken backward compatibility and long term support to a new
> > level
> > > > in TinkerPop 3.x as compared with previous major versions. We're
> about
> > to
> > > > go on eight releases of the 3.1.x line of code. Now that 3.3.0 is
> about
> > > to
> > > > release I'm wondering if we need to continue with support of any kind
> > on
> > > > the 3.1.x line (similar to how we stopped completely stopped dev on
> > > 3.0.x).
> > > >
> > > > I can expand this discussion to the user mailing list, but I thought
> > I'd
> > > > start here to see what people thought. Can we make 3.1.8 our last
> > release
> > > > on that line of code?
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to