On 06/09/2016 10:21 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
## What we want to address
1. regular releases, predictable cycle for users and other projects
2. faster "go to market" with new features, receive feedback from users
3. stable version(s) for 'happily running, no risk' deployments
4. active releases can do monthly bugfix updates (see backport criteria)
## Results of several rounds of discussion
It seems that a 3 month release cycle is the most attractive. Each
alternating major release would be a Long-Term-Support (LTS) one, the
others are short living versions for users that are eager to test out a
new feature.
## Three stable/LTS versions, 1.5 years of bugfixes
## Two stable/LTS versions, 1 year of bugfixes
I prefer the 1 year of bugfixes.
The delta from the older proposal seems to be around how long an LTS is
maintained, which was 2 years in the prior mails, and is 1 year now,
with an LTS release every 6 months, and a 3 month non-LTS release.
This seems more controllable, than 3 non-lts releases followed by an lts
release, where contents can start changing rapidly as we relax criteria
for the non-lts release.
_______________________________________________
maintainers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
