Hi, Generally speaking, EOL doesn’t strictly exist for Apache projects, as anyone can propose a new release on older branches if necessary.
While some projects do use the EOL terminology, I would prefer focusing on "active" branches. This allows us to maintain the flexibility to perform new releases on older branches on demand for cases like CVEs or migrations. I agree with the general approach, but I suggest using "active branches" rather than "EOL" in our wording. Regards, JB Le mar. 3 mars 2026 à 08:42, Alexandre Dutra <[email protected]> a écrit : > Hi all, > > While working on the web site lately I noticed that it had some > tooling to distinguish between "active" and "end-of-life" (EOL) > releases. The tooling wasn't effective until recently, and while > working on the Documentation [1] and Downloads/Releases [2] sections, > I started to make the distinction visible. > > The visual intent is simple: highlight "active" releases (both > documentation and downloads) while limiting the display of old items > to prevent cluttering dropdown menus and sidebars with outdated > information that tend to accumulate over time. > > But we'd need to establish an official policy for defining which > releases are supported and which have reached EOL. > > Currently, my simple, informal approach considers the latest bugfix > versions across the three most recent minor releases as "active." This > currently includes versions 1.3.0, 1.2.0, and 1.1.0. > > Other approaches are obviously possible. It also depends a lot on the > release cadence. I'd appreciate your input and thoughts on > establishing a formal policy for this. > > Thanks, > Alex > > [1]: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/3876 > [2]: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/3902 >
