Thanks, Jonathan. The end-of-life (EOL) question is still dangling out there - when does 3.x go off support, after 3.x+3 or six months after 4.0? Or... six months after 5.0?
-- Jack Krupansky On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 6:15 PM, Jonathan Ellis <jbel...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Jack Krupansky <jack.krupan...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Jonathan, just to complete the list, it would be help to state: > > > > 3.1.x will be maintained until <what> > > 3.2 will be maintained until <what> > > > > One of the confusing things about tick tock is that we're stuck with > numbers that look like the old ones but mean different things. > > In the old world, 2.1 was a release that took a year of work, and it got > maintained with roughly-monthly updates of 2.1.x. > > In the tick tock world, the corresponding series is just "3," and the > monthly updates are 3.1, 3.2, and so forth, with new features allowed in > the even releases every two months. So in general, there will be no 3.1.x > or 3.2.y releases. When a bug is critical enough to make an exception to > the "wait for the next monthly release" rule, it will be fixed in the most > recent bugfix tock. > > will tick-tock completely replace that "traditional" > > section? > > > Yes. > > > > In which case, the question of criteria for defining "stable > > release" remains, unless it becomes no different than the latest > tick-tock > > release. > > > > That's the idea, and that's why we're getting very religious about test > engineering, so that those monthly releases will always be stable. >
