> I would not take on the committment of "releases a new minor release every
> 1-2 years". It's really not a mandatory thing, as nobody has fixed funding
to
> implement new features while it may be possible we raise funds for more
> than one feature during a single year thus triggering 4 different
> Martin Davis writes:
>
> > Our development resource bandwidth, and also downstream pipeline size.
> >
> > I think we should have a policy of one minor release per year (if
> > needed) And (try to) make them somewhat scheduled (which we already
> do
> > informally, to align with PostGIS).
>
In
> To me, this policy is about saying that after 4 years, it's basically out
of the
> question to have an updated version.
Yes that is my intent.
So
A) no one not willing to fork over money dares to ask us to backport a
change to what we consider "an ancient version"
B) As developers not have
Martin Davis writes:
> Our development resource bandwidth, and also downstream pipeline size.
>
> I think we should have a policy of one minor release per year (if needed)
> And (try to) make them somewhat scheduled (which we already do informally,
> to align with PostGIS).
There's a big
On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 9:35 AM Sandro Santilli wrote:
> thus triggering 4 different minor
> releases in that period (what prevents that?).
>
Our development resource bandwidth, and also downstream pipeline size.
I think we should have a policy of one minor release per year (if needed)
And
On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 01:55:48PM -0400, Regina Obe wrote:
> Here is my first pass at a policy.
>
> https://libgeos.org/development/rfcs/rfc11/
I agree with having an EOL policy.
I would not take on the committment of "releases a new minor
release every 1-2 years". It's really not a mandatory
to that date.
Thanks,
Regina
> -Original Message-
> From: geos-devel [mailto:geos-devel-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of
> Paul Ramsey
> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 1:57 PM
> To: GEOS Development List
> Subject: Re: [geos-devel] End of Life Policy (EOL)
>
>
hr
> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 12:23 PM
> To: GEOS Development List
> Subject: Re: [geos-devel] End of Life Policy (EOL)
>
> Regina,
>
> Thank you! This will be a topic of discussion at the NumFocus funded
> projects later this month where I will be representing GDA
Development List
Subject: Re: [geos-devel] End of Life Policy (EOL)
Regina,
Thank you! This will be a topic of discussion at the NumFocus funded projects
later this month where I will be representing GDAL. I will be keeping an eye
on the RFC and this thread for aspects that should be discussed
se, just saying we are okay with that.
>
> Thanks,
> Regina
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: geos-devel [mailto:geos-devel-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf
> Of
> > Paul Ramsey
> > Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 11:37 AM
> > To: GEOS
,
Regina
> -Original Message-
> From: geos-devel [mailto:geos-devel-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of
> Paul Ramsey
> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 11:37 AM
> To: GEOS Development List
> Subject: Re: [geos-devel] End of Life Policy (EOL)
>
> As long as the word &
egina
>
>
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: geos-devel [mailto:geos-devel-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of
>> Paul Ramsey
>> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 11:20 AM
>> To: GEOS Development List
>> Subject: Re: [geos-devel] End of Lif
ginal Message-
> From: geos-devel [mailto:geos-devel-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of
> Paul Ramsey
> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 11:20 AM
> To: GEOS Development List
> Subject: Re: [geos-devel] End of Life Policy (EOL)
>
>
>
> > On Sep 12, 2022, at 8
> On Sep 12, 2022, at 8:28 AM, Daniel Baston wrote:
>
>
> What does it mean to "support" this stuff anyways?
>
> It's useful for maintainers to have a guideline to follow when backporting.
> Do I backport only as far as I can apply the patch cleanly? Or is there a
> list of "supported"
> What does it mean to "support" this stuff anyways?
It's useful for maintainers to have a guideline to follow when backporting.
Do I backport only as far as I can apply the patch cleanly? Or is there a
list of "supported" releases I should try to cover?
Dan
> On Sep 12, 2022, at 8:12 AM, Regina Obe wrote:
>
> I'd like to make an RFC proposing a standardish End of Like Policy
>
> Does anyone have an issue with that?
Only insofar as there's this idea that we support any particular version at
all. Honestly, there are some bugs I just cannot be
I'd like to make an RFC proposing a standardish End of Like Policy
Does anyone have an issue with that?
I'm thinking of a policy along the lines of
We support a release generally at most X plus years after the first version
of it, but we have discretion to increase that if needed.
X = 3 - 5
17 matches
Mail list logo
