You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@trafficserver.apache.org by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> on 2015/07/20 14:23:23 UTC
[PROPOSAL/DISCUSS] New 6.x release schedule
Hi all,
seeing we’re having issues getting v6.0.0 ready and stable for a release candidate, I’d like to propose the following changes to the 6.x release process:
1) v6.0.0 gets pushed out to September 15, 2016. This does *not* mean you should ignore the issues holding up the 6.0.0, on the contrary. Please, it is everyones responsibility to help making these releases, not just the RM.
2) v6.1.0 is scheduled for January 15, 2016, and v6.2.0 for April 15 2016.
3) There is no v6.3.0 release, instead v6.2.0 is the LTS for the 6.x cycle.
4) v7.0.0 stays scheduled for a July 2016 release for now, but we might revisit that after the outcome of the v6.x releases.
On a personal note, I’m a little disappointed that we’ve let the current RM down, and have not been helping him getting the release for v6.0.0 ready for production use in a timely manner. Being RM is an arduous task, everyone, please make an effort of lessen the burden on our RMs by focusing development efforts on the upcoming release(s).
Thanks,
— Leif
Re: [PROPOSAL/DISCUSS] New 6.x release schedule
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>.
> On Jul 20, 2015, at 2:23 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> seeing we’re having issues getting v6.0.0 ready and stable for a release candidate, I’d like to propose the following changes to the 6.x release process:
>
> 1) v6.0.0 gets pushed out to September 15, 2016. This does *not* mean you should ignore the issues holding up the 6.0.0, on the contrary. Please, it is everyones responsibility to help making these releases, not just the RM.
Well dammit, obviously Sep 15 2015.
-- Leif
>
> 2) v6.1.0 is scheduled for January 15, 2016, and v6.2.0 for April 15 2016.
>
> 3) There is no v6.3.0 release, instead v6.2.0 is the LTS for the 6.x cycle.
>
> 4) v7.0.0 stays scheduled for a July 2016 release for now, but we might revisit that after the outcome of the v6.x releases.
>
>
> On a personal note, I’m a little disappointed that we’ve let the current RM down, and have not been helping him getting the release for v6.0.0 ready for production use in a timely manner. Being RM is an arduous task, everyone, please make an effort of lessen the burden on our RMs by focusing development efforts on the upcoming release(s).
>
> Thanks,
>
> — Leif
>
Re: [PROPOSAL/DISCUSS] New 6.x release schedule
Posted by Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>.
> On Jul 20, 2015, at 2:23 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> seeing we’re having issues getting v6.0.0 ready and stable for a release candidate, I’d like to propose the following changes to the 6.x release process:
>
> 1) v6.0.0 gets pushed out to September 15, 2016. This does *not* mean you should ignore the issues holding up the 6.0.0, on the contrary. Please, it is everyones responsibility to help making these releases, not just the RM.
Well dammit, obviously Sep 15 2015.
-- Leif
>
> 2) v6.1.0 is scheduled for January 15, 2016, and v6.2.0 for April 15 2016.
>
> 3) There is no v6.3.0 release, instead v6.2.0 is the LTS for the 6.x cycle.
>
> 4) v7.0.0 stays scheduled for a July 2016 release for now, but we might revisit that after the outcome of the v6.x releases.
>
>
> On a personal note, I’m a little disappointed that we’ve let the current RM down, and have not been helping him getting the release for v6.0.0 ready for production use in a timely manner. Being RM is an arduous task, everyone, please make an effort of lessen the burden on our RMs by focusing development efforts on the upcoming release(s).
>
> Thanks,
>
> — Leif
>
Re: [PROPOSAL/DISCUSS] New 6.x release schedule
Posted by "Adam W. Dace" <co...@gmail.com>.
Sounds like a plan to me. It does look like there's quite a few tickets
open against v6.0. :(
Regards,
Adam
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 7:24 AM Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> seeing we’re having issues getting v6.0.0 ready and stable for a release
> candidate, I’d like to propose the following changes to the 6.x release
> process:
>
> 1) v6.0.0 gets pushed out to September 15, 2016. This does *not* mean you
> should ignore the issues holding up the 6.0.0, on the contrary. Please, it
> is everyones responsibility to help making these releases, not just the RM.
>
> 2) v6.1.0 is scheduled for January 15, 2016, and v6.2.0 for April 15 2016.
>
> 3) There is no v6.3.0 release, instead v6.2.0 is the LTS for the 6.x cycle.
>
> 4) v7.0.0 stays scheduled for a July 2016 release for now, but we might
> revisit that after the outcome of the v6.x releases.
>
>
> On a personal note, I’m a little disappointed that we’ve let the current
> RM down, and have not been helping him getting the release for v6.0.0 ready
> for production use in a timely manner. Being RM is an arduous task,
> everyone, please make an effort of lessen the burden on our RMs by focusing
> development efforts on the upcoming release(s).
>
> Thanks,
>
> — Leif
>
>