I consider 3.2 unmaintained and people should be running 3.3.X. I
consider a valid cross-over period to maintain both releases but
3.2.x has long since dropped off my radar.
3.3.x has only been available since 2010-01-27.
Dropping support for mission critical software after only providing 4
months to do a major upgrade is bullshit.
Dropping support without even mentioning it on the website is similarly
poor.
Compare Ubuntu's 5 years of support for LTS releases on servers.
I'm not speaking on behalf of the project but have the following
personal views which others may disagree with:
First, I would never consider 4 months an acceptable cross over period.
I'm not sure why you think I would. I consider 3.2.X as 3 years old and
replaced by 3.3.X. I hope to get 3.4 out before the end of the year and
I would anticipate supporting 3.3.X and 3.4.X for about 1 year of overlap.
Second, I don't believe the SA project has EVER statement a time period
of support for ANY version.
Third, Spam is considered to be a quickly evolving problem and running
older version is not going to be very conducive. Splitting rules from
the code base should help with longevity.
It should be sufficiently implied that we support the software we provide.
And the nearly 3 years since the last 3.2 release is not the relevant
time period. The 4 months since it was released is.
It should be sufficiently implied that you should be running the latest
version and we don't support 3+ year old versions. I am very confused
by your 4 months statement, though so I think there is a
miscommunication occurring.
Regards,
KAM
