I agree. This is the most sensible way to achieve release alignment.
-- Mike Stolz Principal Engineer, Pivotal Cloud Cache Mobile: +1-631-835-4771 On Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 8:09 PM John Blum <jb...@pivotal.io> wrote: > Put simply, from my perspective, I would like to see LTS versions of Apache > Geode align with the *Spring Data* (*Release Trains*) support for Apache > Geode. > > For example: > > SDG Lovelace/2.1 is based on Apache Geode 1.6.x. > SDG Moore/2.2 is based on Apache Geode 1.9.x. > > Therefore, both Apache Geode 1.6 and 1.9 would be LTS versions, with patch > releases. > > The upcoming SD Neuman/2.3 (now in development given Moore has just went GA > (i.e. 2.2.0.RELEASE) as of today), is currently based on 1.10, but is > likely to move Apache Geode versions (e.g. 1.11, 1.12, or even 1.13) before > SD Neuman reaches RC1. > > SD has longer lifecycles between release trains (1 to 1.5 years per SD > Release Train) than Apache Geode's support cycle, on a particular > major.minor version (e.g. 1.9), which always puts us in a > precarious position. > > $0.02 > -John > > > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 3:55 PM Mark Bretl <mbr...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > It has come up a few times in recent weeks about the possibility of an > LTS > > version of Geode. Is this something the community would be interested in? > > > > There are advantages and disadvantages to supporting an LTS. Some > > advantages may include: > > - Stable release for downstream projects > > - Include security and other maintenance related patches > > > > Disadvantages: > > - Additional support for multiple distributions/versions > > - Release management overhead > > > > Thoughts/Comments/Concerns? > > > > --Mark > > > > > -- > -John > john.blum10101 (skype) >
