On Jul 3, 2015, at 11:13 AM, Rene Moser <m...@renemoser.net> wrote: > Sebastien, > > So wouldn't it be nice to make clear which release is still supported > and which release is not? > > On 03.07.2015 09:20, sebgoa wrote: > >> I think we got in a situation with 4.4 that called for us to keep >> maintaining 4.3….and even after 4.5 was released. Because 4.3 was seen as a >> good release. > > Your are saying 4.3 is a good release, shouldn't it be maintained a bit > "longer"? > > So currently we have: > > main 4.5.x > stable: 4.4.x > legacy: 4.3.x > deprecated: 4.2.0 > > When 4.6 is released, what should a release be dropped? 4.4.x? > > main: 4.6.0 > stable: 4.5.x > legacy: 4.3.x > > What is your plan about this?
What is *our* plan :) We used to only maintain the last two major releases. We diverged from that model when 4.5.0 came out and that we still wanted to maintain 4.3 because 4.3 was working so well for people. My personal preference would be to get into a rolling release model, where we maintain only the last major release. This is why making master stable and the base for all our releases is so important. Users should get into a model where they continuously upgrade/deploy and don't get stuck on a unmaintained branch with forks that prevents upgrade. When users face an issue, we patch and release, then they upgrade always to the latest version. That's the ideal world :) > > Yours > René >
