> > > > 2.11 has just been released and the release cycle is set to 3 months. >
The release cycle wasn't really respected for 2.11... We already have 5 months worth of features on the master branch and nothing tells us that the release of 2.12 won't take 5 more months. And if we add 3 months to that... > > It's not a good idea to call for code freezes without appropriate > warning, and code freezes don't make sense in general: the "master" > branch must always be open for business. > There was already a proposal to codify a formal release plan with > prescribed timings for release RCs and stabilization. > (https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/15966) > It was actually discussed already very recently ((offline) that it's a > good time to formally adopt it for the next release. > The code freeze I'm proposing is the one from this release plan. It's a code freeze of the release branch, not of master. Sorry if that was not clear. I used the word "code freeze" because that's the one used in the PR. Maybe it's inappropriate and should be changed in the PR.
