+1, I am also getting questions about the versioning recently and people themselves do not know what to call the next version like.
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 8:28 PM Jon Haddad <j...@rustyrazorblade.com> wrote: > Bringing this back up. > > I don't think we have any reason to hold up renaming the version. We can > have a separate discussion about what upgrade paths are supported, but > let's at least address this one issue of version number so we can have > consistent messaging. When i talk to people about the next release, I'd > like to be consistent with what I call it, and have a unified voice as a > project. > > Jon > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 1:41 AM Mick Semb Wever <m...@apache.org> wrote: > >> . >> >> >>> If you mean only 4.1 and 5.0 would be online upgrade targets, I would >>> suggest we change that to T-3 so you encompass all “currently supported” >>> releases at the time the new branch is GAed. >>> >>> I think that's better actually, yeah. I was originally thinking T-2 from >>> the "what calendar time frame is reasonable" perspective, but saying "if >>> you're on a currently supported branch you can upgrade to a release that >>> comes out" makes clean intuitive sense. That'd mean: >>> >>> 6.0: 5.0, 4.1, 4.0 online upgrades supported. Drop support for 4.0. API >>> compatible guaranteed w/5.0. >>> 7.0: 6.0, 5.0, 4.1 online upgrades supported. Drop support for 4.1. API >>> compatible guaranteed w/6.0. >>> 8.0: 7.0, 6.0, 5.0 online upgrades supported. Drop support for 5.0. API >>> compatible guaranteed w/7.0. >>> >> >> >> >> I like this. >> >>
