+1 to the proposal

> *We reserve the right to release more frequently than this if we decide
to*
> MAJOR.MINOR? Would keep oldest GA for a predictable length with support
model but introduce a new branch into our merge-path which is extra merge
and CI toil.
> Or new MAJOR and we drop oldest supported? If we cut alphas (see below),
the pressure for out-of-cycle releases to make features available may be
mitigated.

If we really want to do this, it feels reasonable to say it should be
something important enough to force a new MAJOR, drop the oldest
supported major, and "reset" the "alpha clock" back to 1. Otherwise, making
it into the next scheduled alpha and then the following MAJOR on a 12-month
boundary should be fine. The nightmare scenario for that, though, is when
we want to do it in, let's say...February, while the Jan 1 MAJOR is in
beta. Maybe it's better to just avoid it.

On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 2:30 PM Josh McKenzie <[email protected]> wrote:

> What I mean is if we decide the train leaves the station on December 1,
> how do we choose the features on the train?
>
> Features merged to trunk should be in one of the following 3 states:
>
>    1. alpha: Not exposed to users if they don't yet work (available via
>    .yaml config maybe, etc)
>    2. beta: Exposed but flagged as experimental and off by default
>    3. ga: Exposed and available by default (barring any guardrails, etc)
>
> So whatever features are committed and beta before that date are in the
> release and available at varying levels of ease to our users. No need to
> decide what goes into a release since, worst-case, you merge a ga feature
> to trunk 1 day after we froze and it's available via the next alpha in 3
> months.
>
> I'm using alpha / beta / GA above in a somewhat new way for us that
> reflects what we've *actually* been doing. I think using the same
> alpha/beta/GA hierarchy for features as we use for releases would help
> provide consistency and symmetry for user expectations, but that's another
> topic I plan to bring up after we get alignment here.
>
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2025, at 2:59 PM, Brandon Williams wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 1:55 PM Patrick McFadin <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > What I mean is if we decide the train leaves the station on December 1,
> how do we choose the features on the train?
>
> They are committed before the train leaves, or they have to wait for
> the next one.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Brandon
>
>
>

Reply via email to