Just some quick "hot impressions" about this topic - I think we all agree we need to adopt a faster, more predictable release policy that won't make people wait "indefinitely" for a new main release. After all we are surrounded by good examples (Java in primis) of projects that benefited from switching to this new kind of policy (better innovation rate, etc...). So thanks again to Martijn and Emond! - I also think a 3 months release cycle is too narrow. Don't get me wrong, I do appreciate the positive energy about this idea, but I don't know sustainable would be in the long run, both in terms of new ideas and the effort we would ask to our users to stay up-to-date. I would stay on a more "safe side" adopting a 6 months windows like already done by other projects (Java, Ubuntu, etc..). Since Wicket is Java based I think it would be good following a similar timeline. Just my 2 cents. - It's funny seeing how we got struck by the same AI-related stress that happened in other bigger projects :-) , but I guess (and hope) that the amount of work required by LLM generated security issues will be much less intense after this first "big new wave" of contributions... - About dependencies (required JDK, Jakarta EE, etc...) I think it would be better if we stick to Java LTS releases, which means change JDK versions only when a new LTS is out. I don't think most of our users are willing to adopt the latest Java release unless it's an LTS.
Andrea.
