On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 7:43 PM, Mikhail Antonov <[email protected]> wrote: > ... > > Speaking specifically about branch-1 and given 2.0 release > discussions, is it proper time/thread to also discuss what > do we want to do with branch-1? Like, say that 1.4 would be > the last release off this line and hence branch-1 should be > turned to 1.4, and should we wind down backports to it?
On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote: > I would like to see branch-1 be our new long term stable branch and so to be > maintained for roughly as long as 0.98 was: three years from first release > (1.0.0). > > ... I would definitely not be comfortable retiring branch-1 any time this CY, given the unknown state of both the 2.0 release process and how long that branch has been without a release. Three years from 1.0.0 puts us at February 2018. The 0.98 branch had the benefit of nearly 2 years overlap with branch-1 releases; should branch-1 have a similar window with branch-2?
