On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 5:06 PM Daniel Sahlberg <daniel.l.sahlb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is a thread reply and not directly to Johan's e-mail, just grabbed > the last one in the thread. > > I'm trying to sum up the thread with the hope that we can reach a decision > within the next few days. > > In the thread there has been various +1's from Johan Corveleyn, Nathan > Hartman, Daniel Shahaf and me. Stefan Sperling raised valuable points which > I hope we have addressed (mainly not to have too many LTS releases at the > same time: If we end up in a situation with frequent releases we should > make new releases Regular instead of LTS). I have not seen anyone object to > move away from time-based releases and I believe we are approaching > consensus on this. > > Daniel Shahaf and I have co-authored some updates in > staging: r1900404,r1900405,r1900528,r1900532,r1900561,r1900562. I have test > merged these changes to publish and attach a patch showing the actual diff. > I've had a busy last few days and didn't respond here but I reviewed the above commits soon after they were done as well as the page itself at staging as it is now, and it looks good to me. There were a few minor things I was going to mention but they were fixed before I got around to bringing them up. Thanks Daniel and Daniel for your work on this and thanks to everyone for providing input. I think this release policy is a reasonable middle ground between the original and the recent one, which is realistic and still keeps the most important benefits of both. Hopefully everyone is happy with it. If you have any input either way, please speak up!! Regarding declaring 1.10 EOL, it was announced to have a 4 year support > period /after/ it was released. I have seen no objections on applying this > and assume we are approaching consensus on this as well. There will be a > few additional changes (as noted by Danielsh elsewhere) to the website and > to dist/release caused by the EOL. > > I will allow the thread a few days to soak to give everyone a last chance > to raise concerns before making the actual commits. > Yes, let's wait and see for a few more days. Cheers, Nathan
