No better place than the download page to communicate the lifecycle. Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 4, 2021, at 9:19 PM, Michael Marshall <mikemars...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Enrico, > > Thank you for starting this conversation. I have been meaning to > follow up on this topic for some time, so I already have some thoughts to > share. > > Based on my interpretation of PIP-47 [0], we committed to support each > minor release for a year after its initial release. We created tag > "v2.6.0" on June, 17th 2020, so we can technically stop releasing > patch updates for 2.6. There has only been one commit (a bug fix) to > branch-2.6 since the 2.6.4 release. My preference is to say that 2.6 > has already reached its EOL, but if we think the EOL wasn't > communicated clearly enough, we could of course do one final patch > release. We created tag "v2.7.0" on November, 30th 2020, so I think it > deserves at least one more patch release. > > Moving forward, I would like to see our versioning policy added to the > website to ensure that users can plan accordingly. Our current policy > is only published in a PIP, and it isn't explicitly defined for each > minor version. In my opinion, the best way to communicate our EOL > policy is to add a table with specific version EOL dates to our Pulsar > website. I will follow up this week with a PR to add a versioning > policy table to the website. > > Thanks, > Michael > > [0] - > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/PIP-47%3A-Time-Based-Release-Plan#what-is-our-eol-policy > [1] - > https://lists.apache.org/x/thread.html/ra2db06e8da85bff67d8d588dc1e93d965f2e1d70c95bda2f08d14138@%3Cdev.pulsar.apache.org%3E > [2] - https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/10829 > > > > > >> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 3:26 AM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hello folks, >> It has been quite some time since the latest releases of branch 2.6 and 2.7. >> >> We should cut a release. >> >> Probably we should also start a discussion about sending 2.6 to EOL as we >> are releasing 2.9.0. >> >> I am following the release for 2.9, >> is there any volunteer to drive a release for 2.7 and one for 2.6 ? >> >> Enrico
