EOL 2.1.x

[Ignasi Barrera <na...@apache.org>]

Hi!

Now that we're releasing 2.2.0, and will move master to 2.3.0-SNAPSHOT
and create the 2.2.x branch, I think we should assume the EOL of the
2.1.x branch and do not cherry-pick issues there unless they are
critical security issues.

This is usually what we do, we keep the last *.x" branch and master,
but just wanted to make it explicit. I plan to include that in the
release notes for 2.1.3 unless anyone objects.


Thanks!

I.

Re: EOL 2.1.x

[Andrew Phillips <ap...@qrmedia.com>]

> I think we should assume the EOL of the 2.1.x branch and do not 
> cherry-pick
> issues there unless they are critical security issues.

+1 to that from me, too.

ap

Re: EOL 2.1.x

[Andrew Gaul <ga...@apache.org>]

On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 09:55:19AM +0200, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> Now that we're releasing 2.2.0, and will move master to 2.3.0-SNAPSHOT
> and create the 2.2.x branch, I think we should assume the EOL of the
> 2.1.x branch and do not cherry-pick issues there unless they are
> critical security issues.
> 
> This is usually what we do, we keep the last *.x" branch and master,
> but just wanted to make it explicit. I plan to include that in the
> release notes for 2.1.3 unless anyone objects.

+1.  Given the rate of development, perhaps it also makes sense to cut
releases *only* from master from now on?

-- 
Andrew Gaul
http://gaul.org/