On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 5:07 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Gregg Smith <g...@gknw.net> wrote: > >> On 5/16/2016 11:03 AM, Eric Covener wrote: >> >>> One shortcoming of a 12 month countdown is that some folks will not be >>> able to plan/pitch/budget/execute a migration in 12 calendar months >>> because of bad timing. >>> >>> As long as we're not committing to releases in this window, I'd >>> personally be okay with pushing out to 18 months re: the later >>> feedback in this thread. I don't feel too strongly about> 12 months >>> notice, but I will still have a 2.2-derivative in support beyond that >>> window anyway. >>> >> >> We should just pick a date right now (say 31/12/2017) and begin >> announcing (website/download page/mail lists) it now. Include that one last >> release will come out before the end of the year and it will be patches >> only after final release and until EOL date. That is 18 and a half months >> to EOL with a final release within 6 and a half. >> > > To square this circle... I had expect that the 'final release' for httpd > 2.2 would > be based on the need for a security fix release, and expected that this may > happen as many times over that year long period as were necessary. > So let's try this... would 2.2.x maintainers and PMC folks please answer this poll -if- you have an intention to help throughout the wind-down of 2.2.x, since this is all predicated on having committed-committers to participate. This isn't to say folks refuse to participate after the time period you offer, but for how long you are personally prepared to participate. [If you aren't a 2.2.x legacy branch participant, testing RCs or applying backports, then no response is needed.] *) I intend to help maintain/test 2.2.x releases over the next [____] mos *) I intend to backport/review 2.2.x security patches over the next [____] mos
