Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 14:43:38 -0800 (PST) From: John Kozubik <john@kozubik.com> To: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD has serious problems with focus, longevity, and lifecycle Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1201191441550.19710@kozubik.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1201191422060.68547@172-17-198-245.tybonyfhvgr.arg> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1112211415580.19710@kozubik.com> <1326756727.23485.10.camel@Arawn> <4F14BAA7.9070707@freebsd.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1201181034580.51158@fledge.watson.org> <4F16A5B8.2080903@FreeBSD.org> <Pine.GSO.4.64.1201181147450.6287@sea.ntplx.net> <4F1707E6.4020905@FreeBSD.org> <CADWvR2ip=nADz=BLXW%2BuNkyUP4hUf88UkOhSoz%2B0AcY79Hzdag@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1201181141270.19710@kozubik.com> <4F172B1E.30401@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1201191402290.19710@kozubik.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1201191422060.68547@172-17-198-245.tybonyfhvgr.arg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Doug, On Thu, 19 Jan 2012, Doug Barton wrote: >>> What I've proposed instead is a new major release every 2 1/2 years, >>> where the new release coincides with the EOL of the oldest production >>> release. That way we have a 5-year cycle of support for each major >>> branch, and no more than 2 production branches extant at one time. >> >> >> I think that at first glance, 2.5 or 3 years sounds completely reasonable. > > You're not following the math. :) I'm proposing a 5 year support cycle for > each production branch. Yes, you're right - I missed that. 5 year support, and overlapping 2.5 year majors ... provided that minors got increased to 3 per year ... would be fantastic.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1201191441550.19710>