On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 13:37 -0700, Jo Rhett wrote:
Normal
Releases which are published from a -STABLE branch will be
supported by the Security Officer for a minimum of 12 months after
the
release.
A release which is not the final minor release of a branch will
be additionally supported by a minimum of 6 months past the release
date of the succeeding version. For example X.1 will be supported
for
12 months or until 6 months past the release date of X.2, whichever
comes later.
Final
The final minor release on a given branch will be supported by
the Security Officer for a minimum of 24 months after the release.
On Sep 25, 2008, at 7:53 AM, Tom Evans wrote:
Isn't this a non-pragmatic way of looking at this? Currently, as
long as
there are no serious issues with 6.4, 6.4 will be supported for 24
months from release. This is abundantly clear from both prior history
and what secteam say.
No, it's not. The secteam has repeatedly said that they don't know
yet, and can't know yet, whether or not to support 6.4 for 12 or 24
months. This is the problem I am trying to solve. Guessing at this
requires foresight, psychic abilities that nobody has. I believe it's
a lot more pragmatic to simply say "we will support it for 24 months
*unless* a major problem forces another release" and stop trying to be
psychic.
To my mind, this entire discussion is bikeshed painting
that ends up with semantic arguing about what a 'final' release is.
It's not semantics. It's a very serious issue with overlapping
support periods that cause businesses to stay back on older releases,
which means they contribute no resources to testing new releases.
--
Jo Rhett
Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source
and other randomness
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
