Re: Intentions for 1.11 release timing
From: Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_apache.org>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 14:29:25 +0100
Johan Corveleyn wrote:
Yes, let's agree a plan. Thanks for raising this.
The suggestion below for a 6-month "fast" cycle with 2-year "LTS" releases is in line with what I think we should be doing and what I think we *can* do. On top of that, it is similar to what some other stable software projects do (I'm thinking of Ubuntu).
So I support that plan.
I don't recall any objections outstanding. Yes, of course it will be more difficult initially, and yes, we don't have much capacity, but the idea is that the new plan will improve the situation.
Some details need "fleshing out" (such as what we do if the schedule slips considerably), but that is fine, we can decide those details after the main decision.
> > - WC multiple format support: we're okay for now (1.8 - 1.10 have the
It would be good, yes, but not a blocker. We can continue without it for the time being. If and when we want or need a format bump, we can figure out what to do at that point.
> > - Frequency: should we aim for 6 months, or 9, 12, ... for the "fast
> So, IMHO, we just need to pick a date for creating the 1.11.x branch
Branch for stabilization 4 months after the last release (which was in 2018-04), so:
* Branch in 2018-08
(I choose the 1.10 release date rather than branching date as a baseline, because we had much more and much older changes that needed testing, reviewing and fixing. In a 6-month cycle we should be able to stabilize more quickly.)
At this time, I know of no reason why I would not be able to RM 1.11 myself. Otherwise I am happy to lend some support to someone else doing it.
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.