Personally, I'm all for a time released as Dan indicates below. It is
much easier to plan and something like the Fedora schedule works well (I
really like the detail of the Fedora schedule also). I'm just not sure
what is a realistic time frame between feature freeze and general release.
If a
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 03:42:52PM -0500, Kathy Lussier wrote:
> Thanks for forwarding this along Anoop! I think the time-based releases will
> be very helpful as institutions plan their upgrades, and a 15-month support
> cycle seems reasonable. In general, I would say this is a positive move
> for
cussion List
Cc: Ben Hyman
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] [OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION] Official EOL
Policy
Based on Ben's suggestion and discussion during the last developer's
meeting here is the revised release& EOL policy proposal:
"Time based releases occur every 6 months with each releas
sion Group; Evergreen Development Discussion List
>>Cc: Ben Hyman
>>Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] [OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION] Official EOL
>>Policy
>>
>>Based on Ben's suggestion and discussion during the last developer's
>>meeting here is the revised release
Based on Ben's suggestion and discussion during the last developer's
meeting here is the revised release & EOL policy proposal:
"Time based releases occur every 6 months with each release getting 15
months of support (12 for general bugs and 3 more for security)."
The current proposal is to r
