I think that we should be maintaining the latest stable release, at least as long as we are moving at the current release rate. It's important to keep in mind though that we can only do this as long as we offer upgrade paths to the latest versions. A
s soon as there is a stronger community of adopters, there may be certain releases that get extended support, mostly coming from the adopting institutions, with help from the developers. Tobias On 10.07.2012, at 22:11, Greg Logan <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi folks, > > Do we have a support policy for older releases? This came up at the > meeting this morning, when I pointed out that 1.2.x's 3rd party tool > script now contains 404's (which is alleviated in 1.3 and newer at > least), and 1.3.0 no longer builds without certain dependencies being > precached because of a Maven issue. > > How long is a given release supported for? How much work are we willing > to put into this? Ruediger suggested creating repositories, but this > has been suggested in the past and very few (aside from his group) seem > willing to maintain such a project. > > Thoughts? Comments? > > G > > _______________________________________________ > Matterhorn mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn > > > To unsubscribe please email > [email protected] > _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Matterhorn mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn To unsubscribe please email [email protected] _______________________________________________
