Not necessarily, I wasn't picturing a scenario where we release in lock step with a platform so much as just jumping to the next gen of platforms when it makes sense. Although I get the point, this could be tricky. On Oct 31, 2012 8:58 PM, "Joe Brockmeier" <j...@zonker.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 07:16:28PM -0600, Marcus Sorensen wrote: > > We could also do something else like align major revs with target > > platforms, e.g. 4.0 targets centos 6.x and Ubuntu 12.04, with minor revs > > being feature releases. That may help solidify the support life cycle as > > well, and we just rev when the next generation of platforms is chosen and > > tested. > > The problem with targeting major revs with target platforms is that the > primary target platforms aren't on similar development cycles. > > CentOS follows RHEL, which isn't on the same cadence as Ubuntu LTS. If > we're picking a platform to base the release cycles on, we'd have to > choose between one or the other. > -- > Joe Brockmeier > Twitter: @jzb > http://dissociatedpress.net/ >
