On a related note, according to the release policy page (https://pulsar.apache.org/contribute/release-policy/#supported-versions), the 3.1 branch only has ~16 more days of support. I'm hoping that 3.2.0 gets the green light for release before then, because we really didn't get much of a support overlap between the 3.1 and 3.2 releases.
Thanks, Alex -----Original Message----- From: Frank Kelly <fke...@cogitocorp.com.INVALID> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2024 10:44 AM To: dev@pulsar.apache.org Subject: '[External]'Re: [DISCUSS] 2.10 & 2.11 EOL - pulsar.apache.org website shows that support has ended [You don't often get email from fke...@cogitocorp.com.invalid. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] Clarity around this would be useful as we just started the process of upgrading from 2.10.3 to 2.11.3 I know 3.0 now has LTS but I not hoping to have to do another update for a while https://pulsar.apache.org/blog/2023/05/02/announcing-apache-pulsar-3-0/ Frank On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 6:11 AM Lari Hotari <lhot...@apache.org> wrote: > Bumping this thread to the top. We need to find a resolution. > > -Lari > > On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 at 11:13, Lari Hotari <lhot...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Our website shows that "active support" and "security support" has > > ended > on 11 Jan 2024 for 2.11 and on 18 Apr 2023 for 2.10 . You can find > this information in our release policy page at > > https://pulsar.apache.org/contribute/release-policy/#supported-versi > > ons > . > > > > Does this mean that the Apache Pulsar PMC won't be driving more new > releases for branch-2.11 and branch-2.10 ? Are there exceptions? > > Do we need to make a separate decision about 2.10 & 2.11 EOL ? > > > > -Lari > > > > On 2023/12/19 06:25:20 Michael Marshall wrote: > > > Hi Pulsar Community, > > > > > > Do we consider the 2.10 release line EOL? If not, is there a > > > committer that would like to volunteer to release 2.10.6? > > > > > > We briefly discussed keeping 2.10 alive in June [0], and that was > > > followed by a 2.10.5 release in July. Given that we already have > > > 2.11, 3.0, 3.1, and now a discussion on 3.2, it seems > > > unsustainable to keep > > > 2.10 going much longer. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Michael > > > > > > [0] > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/w4jzk27qhtosgsz7l9bmhf1t7o9mxjhp > > > >
