Re: [geos-devel] End of Life Policy (EOL)
> 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 minor > releases in that period (what prevents that?). > I revised the sentence to: "generally releases a new minor release every 1-2 years" So we are not held up to a commitment to do so. > > If people are agreeable with it, I can put a link to it on the > > download page -- https://libgeos.org/usage/download/ > > +1 I saw you already used EOL in the 3.5 record. > I'd explain the acronym for the occasional reader too > > --strk; I was going to link to the RFC with a (End-of-Life (EOL) and Version Policy) text so it's self-explanatory ___ geos-devel mailing list geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
Re: [geos-devel] End of Life Policy (EOL)
> 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 this case, I had specified 1-2 years following our current behavior. We could maybe soften that a bit by adding the word "generally" such as below. "The GEOS project generally releases a new minor release every 1-2 years. Each minor release has a git repo dedicated branch for it named after the minor version." Our cadence is something I think is useful for users and packagers of GEOS to know, so they know when they can expect new features. As Greg stated, I would not want to say we absolutely follow this, though I can't remember a time we haven't pushed out a new minor release for longer than 2 years. ___ geos-devel mailing list geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
Re: [geos-devel] End of Life Policy (EOL)
> 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 to think about which branches we have to backport bug fixes. Sure we have to think a little about "is this safe to backport to X", but if we say as a general rule, things that have reached EOL, we never backport to those and clearly spell out what we consider EOL. C) Send a message to packagers that if you are packaging an end of life version on a new distribution, you should think long and hard about that and also what is the expected life of any version you deploy. By packagers I'm including DbaaS providers in this group. ___ geos-devel mailing list geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
Re: [geos-devel] End of Life Policy (EOL)
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 difference between Our current plans are to do X. We plan not to do Y. and We have a policy of releasing if Z. As a maintainer of various things, I have found people who use Free Software to act remarkably entitled as if they had a several-$K/year support contract. Thus I very much avoid anything that sounds like commitment to do something. To me, this policy is about saying that after 4 years, it's basically out of the question to have an updated version. signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ geos-devel mailing list geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
Re: [geos-devel] End of Life Policy (EOL)
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 (try to) make them somewhat scheduled (which we already do informally, to align with PostGIS). ___ geos-devel mailing list geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
Re: [geos-devel] End of Life Policy (EOL)
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 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 minor releases in that period (what prevents that?). > If people are agreeable with it, I can put a link to it on the download page > -- https://libgeos.org/usage/download/ +1 I saw you already used EOL in the 3.5 record. I'd explain the acronym for the occasional reader too --strk; ___ geos-devel mailing list geos-devel@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
