Makes sense to me. Is the upgrade path straightforward? For example, Apache Pulsar 2.7.5 currently uses release line 4.12, so it would need to be upgraded to at least 4.14 if we wanted to stay on a supported version.
Thanks, Michael On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 3:08 AM steven lu <lushiji2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > +1 I agree. > > Nicolò Boschi <boschi1...@gmail.com> 于2022年9月27日周二 16:00写道： > > > I agree. And it actually reflects what we're doing in the community (only > > cherry-pick to branches 4.14 and 4.15). > > > > In my opinion we should formalize this process in order to have a clear > > vision when 4.16.0 will be out. > > This will also help users to understand the entire lifecycle of the > > project. > > > > For me having two release lines is acceptable. > > > > Nicolò Boschi > > > > > > Il giorno mar 27 set 2022 alle ore 08:43 Enrico Olivelli < > > eolive...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > > > > Hello, > > > I propose to declare end-of-life on all the release lines prior to 4.14. > > > > > > We wanted to follow a time-based release plan, but actually we are not > > > following it. > > > > > > This is the doc on our website > > > https://bookkeeper.apache.org/community/releases > > > > > > If nobody objects, I will start a separate thread with a VOTE for this > > > resolution. > > > > > > End-of-life generally means "no more releases" so: > > > - no more bug fixes > > > - no more security fixes > > > - no patches accepted to be cherry-picked to those branches > > > > > > Please chime in with your thoughts > > > > > > Enrico > > > > >
