[RESULTS] [POLL] Commitment to 2.2.x lifecycle? (Was: End of the road of 2.2.x maintenance?)

[William A Rowe Jr]

On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 10:11 AM, William A Rowe Jr 
wrote:

>
> 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
>

Thanks for all your feedback... if my tally is correct;

6 mos 12 mos 18 mos
covener covener covener
wrowe
rpluem
druggeri
rjung
jorton wrowe
rpluem
druggeri
rjung
jorton
gsmith


>
>  *) I intend to backport/review 2.2.x security patches over the next
> [] mos
>


6 mos 12 mos 18 mos
drugerri
covener
rjung
yann drugerri
covener
rjung
yann drugerri
covener
rjung
yann
wrowe
rpluem
jaillet
jorton wrowe
rpluem
jailletc36
jorton
gls

It seems we can safely call out the following in the 2.4.21 and future 2.2.x
releases;

"The Apache Web Server Project will continue to provide maintenance
releases of the 2.2.x flavor through June of 2017, and will provide some
security patches beyond this date through at least December of 2017.
Minimal maintenance patches are expected throughout this period,
and users are strongly encouraged to complete their transitions to
the 2.4.x flavor of httpd on an expedited basis to benefit from a larger
assortment of bug fixes, software robustness and new features."

Or something along those lines.

Re: [POLL] Commitment to 2.2.x lifecycle? (Was: End of the road of 2.2.x maintenance?)

[Joe Orton]

On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 10:11:40AM -0500, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> 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 [12] mos
> 
>  *) I intend to backport/review 2.2.x security patches over the next [12]
> mos

I can certainly test a "final"-ish 2.2 release in this timescale though 
I may need a prod :)

For selected (Critical) security issues we'll still be working on 2.2 
backports through to 2020 for RHEL6, so likely I or somebody else @ Red 
Hat will be willing to co-operate upstream on backports, if only in 
patches/ or whatever.

Regards, Joe

Re: [POLL] Commitment to 2.2.x lifecycle? (Was: End of the road of 2.2.x maintenance?)

[Christophe JAILLET]

*) I intend to help maintain/test 2.2.x releases over the next [ 0 ] mos

*) I intend to backport/review 2.2.x security patches over the next [ 12 
] mos

Re: [POLL] Commitment to 2.2.x lifecycle? (Was: End of the road of 2.2.x maintenance?)

[William A Rowe Jr]

On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 10:11 AM, William A Rowe Jr 
wrote:

>
> 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
>

With the holiday weekend here in the US, I'll let the poll run a full week,
and cross-tabulate the results for us this coming Wednesday.

Re: [POLL] Commitment to 2.2.x lifecycle? (Was: End of the road of 2.2.x maintenance?)

[Yann Ylavic]

On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 5:11 PM, William A Rowe Jr  wrote:
>
*) I intend to help maintain/test 2.2.x releases over the next [18] mos
*) I intend to backport/review 2.2.x security patches over the next [18] mos

Re: [POLL] Commitment to 2.2.x lifecycle? (Was: End of the road of 2.2.x maintenance?)

[Rainer Jung]

Am 25.05.2016 um 18:11 schrieb William A Rowe Jr:

 *) I intend to help maintain/test 2.2.x releases over the next [12] mos

 *) I intend to backport/review 2.2.x security patches over the next
[18] mos


Rainer

Re: [POLL] Commitment to 2.2.x lifecycle? (Was: End of the road of 2.2.x maintenance?)

[Gregg Smith]

On 5/25/2016 8:11 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:

  *) I intend to help maintain/test 2.2.x releases over the next [_6__] mos
  *) I intend to backport/review 2.2.x security patches over the next [_0__] mos

Re: [POLL] Commitment to 2.2.x lifecycle? (Was: End of the road of 2.2.x maintenance?)

[Eric Covener]

On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 11:11 AM, William A Rowe Jr  wrote:

*) I intend to help maintain/test 2.2.x releases over the next [18] mos
*) I intend to backport/review 2.2.x security patches over the next [18] mos

Re: [POLL] Commitment to 2.2.x lifecycle? (Was: End of the road of 2.2.x maintenance?)

[Daniel Ruggeri]

 *) I intend to help maintain/test 2.2.x releases over the next [_12___] mos
 *) I intend to backport/review 2.2.x security patches over the next
[_18___] mos

-- 
Daniel Ruggeri

Re: [POLL] Commitment to 2.2.x lifecycle? (Was: End of the road of 2.2.x maintenance?)

[Ruediger Pluem]

On 05/25/2016 05:11 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 5:07 PM, William A Rowe Jr  > wrote:
> 
> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Gregg Smith  > 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 [_12___] mos
 *) I intend to backport/review 2.2.x security patches over the next [_12___] 
mos


Regards

Rüdiger

Re: [POLL] Commitment to 2.2.x lifecycle? (Was: End of the road of 2.2.x maintenance?)

[William A Rowe Jr]

 *) I intend to help maintain/test 2.2.x releases over the next 12 mos

 *) I intend to backport/review 2.2.x security patches over the next 12 mos

[POLL] Commitment to 2.2.x lifecycle? (Was: End of the road of 2.2.x maintenance?)

[William A Rowe Jr]

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 5:07 PM, William A Rowe Jr 
wrote:

> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Gregg Smith  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