Thanks for your prompt answer

Do you think it could be annonced somewhere on the samba website/wiki when
the final decision will be taken?

Yannick Bergeron
yaberger@ca.ibm.com
Poste 7711



"Gerald (Jerry) Carter"
2008-04-21 11:59

To
Jim McDonough
cc
yaberger@ca.ibm.com, samba-technical@lists.samba.org
Subject
Re: Timed releases, versions, etc... [was Re: Freeze proto.h?]






-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jim McDonough wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 11:35 AM, wrote:
>> with your proposition, how long would each release be maintained?
>>
>> This is kinda important for us to know because we've a politic to not

run
>> unsupported software (for bugs and security issues).

> Keep in mind that this is a samba.org statement of support, not a
> vendor statement, so if you are running a vendor's package, it could
> be a shorter or longer period than whatever samba.org chooses.


Yup. Great point. From upstream, I think a 6month overlap in releases
might be enuf.

So 3.2 would be supported for a total of 12 months from the
initial .0 release. 6 months during thr 3.3 development obviously
and then for 6 months following the 3.3 release. So at post a
6 month overlap on support between production releases.






cheers, jerry
- --
================================================== ===================
Samba ------- http://www.samba.org
Likewise Software --------- http://www.likewisesoftware.com
"What man is a man who does not make the world better?" --Balian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFIDLnqIR7qMdg1EfYRAmo6AKCA41oJ9X9rdXIeIzmm7w ArJxiS1wCgkpwf
ScLfJm8QeCeDbvjpEy0m5MI=
=PhDn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----