Joe McCabe wrote: > I understand the difficulties involved in dropping older releases.
I'm sure you understand them better than I do-- my comments were not intended to say otherwise. :) Those two threads gave me a remarkable amount of insight into the integration between these components and the mechanics behind Solaris releases/ARC, so I still suggest reading them. > > I'm voicing my opinion from the perspective of what is sustainable for > our team (long tail of QA for updates, support, etc) gives users > depending on a "certified" platform long enough notice to plan > migrations to the newer software. > > Perhaps my proposal could be clarified to include: > > "Dropped" versions will still be made available for users that need > them, but support will be limited to community engagement. What I was thinking of is state a "minimum" of xx months. The actual support lifecycle to be determined based on both demand from customers and what's feasible with respect to keeping in synch with the upstream. That would allow people to plan accordingly, and keep it sane for us. Matt -- Matt Ingenthron - Web Infrastructure Solutions Architect Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Global Systems Practice http://blogs.sun.com/mingenthron/ email: matt.ingenthron at sun.com Phone: 310-242-6439
