On Sat, Oct 16, 2021 at 8:57 AM Daniel Sahlberg <daniel.l.sahlb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I second Mark's suggestion that we should only list those providing recent > versions. Would this be a reasonable definition: "Any software listed should > provide the latest bugfix of any supported version", where "version" is 1.10, > 1.14 etc. > > I realise this would rule out both WANdisco and CollabNet immediately since > they don't provide the latest bugfix release. We could delay implementing the > policy until april next year (when 1.10 is out of support). > As long as we are in agreement about what we think the policy ought to be we should just go ahead and do it. I feel like it leads to 3 possibilities for any packagers that we remove from our page: 1. This motivates them to update their packages and get listed again. 2. This reveals that they are no longer going to provide new packages 3. They come back to us with some kind of valid reasons that we were not aware of and we adjust the policy I personally feel like all 3 of these outcomes are better for the Subversion project than the current status quo. In terms of the policy, I think it should be that our latest LTS release must be available. If they have other packages available that is fine but the latest LTS must be one of them. In terms of the types of exceptions I could envision, perhaps we will discover it is really difficult to package the latest LTS for certain older distros and so they need to provide an older version. I would be OK with an exception like this but I would prefer to have the packagers raise it to us. Mark
