I removed the "release/2.9.6" label from 50 PRs: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20533 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20513 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20482 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20416 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20363 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20346 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20341 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20326 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20288 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20244 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20233 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20230 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20176 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20122 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20055 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20046 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20043 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20037 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20030 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20025 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19975 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19972 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19957 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19934 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19815 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19775 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19735 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19727 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19700 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19696 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19662 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/17095 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/18092 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/17820 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/18007 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/18688 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/17338 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19661 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/17751 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19581 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19031 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/16502 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/15628 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/15363 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/15852 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/15494 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14327 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/13298 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14287 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/14641
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 4:37 PM Michael Marshall <mmarsh...@apache.org> wrote: > > In light of this thread, I think we have a (lazy) consensus that 2.8 > and 2.9 are EOL and we will continue to maintain 2.10. > > Would someone be able to update the website to say that 2.10 is not EOL? > > I will update the GitHub labels to indicate the 2.9 label should no > longer be used. > > Thanks, > Michael > > On Fri, Jun 9, 2023 at 4:33 AM Yunze Xu <x...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > This is the latest release that runs on JDK11 > > > > This point makes sense to me. Actually I think it's the latest release > > that runs on JDK 8 though the recommended JDK for 2.10 is 11. The only > > question from me is when should 2.10 be EOL? > > > > Thanks, > > Yunze > > > > On Fri, Jun 9, 2023 at 3:15 PM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Micheal, > > > > > > Il giorno ven 9 giu 2023 alle ore 07:54 Michael Marshall > > > <mmarsh...@apache.org> ha scritto: > > > > > > > > Hi Pulsar Community, > > > > > > > > I recently noticed this page on our website: > > > > https://pulsar.apache.org/contribute/release-policy/#supported-versions > > > > > > > > It shows that only 2.11 and 3.0 are active and security support. > > > > > > > > I am guessing the timelines were taken from a strict reading of PIP > > > > 47. However, we haven't historically followed the EOL timelines for > > > > PIP 47 strictly, so I want to check here. > > > > > > > > For 2.8, I think we should declare it EOL or perform once last release. > > > > > > I agree > > > > > > > > > > > For 2.9, I think we could do the same as 2.8, but I am not sure if > > > > that would surprise users. > > > > > > I am not sure, but as far as I know, 2.9 was kind of a transitional > > > release, and I agree > > > > > > > > > > > For 2.10, I think we should not consider it EOL. > > > > > > This is the latest release that runs on JDK11, we really cannot drop > > > support for this. > > > It would be worth declaring this LTS, as long as JDK11 is still widely > > > used. > > > > > > This issue was discussed many times when we decided to move to JDK17 on > > > 2.11. > > > > > > Cheers > > > Enrico > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let me know what you think. > > > > > > > > (Reminder: all feedback is welcome, especially from users!) > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > Michael
