Re: What's our official stance on small self-contained additions in a micro version

On 3 April 2015 05:55:27 GMT+01:00, Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi! > >> +1 This is exactly it. The longer older versions are "supported" the >> longer they remain in the wild. > >5.3 is unsupported and still has over 40%. 5.2 is dead for 4 years by >now and still beats 5.5 by factor of more than 2. So I don't think just >unsupporting something will make a big difference there. The problem is that all the stats we have cover versions that predate the current release process. We've actually only had two "minor releases" under the new definition, 5.5 and 5.6; and the next release is a major, so will be different again. If we have a smooth series of 7.x releases, we may see a very different pattern of adoption in, say, 5 years time. Unfortunately, we can't wait until then to decide on change policy, because the policy is required to get that adoption. So ultimately, we have to make some informed guesses based on feedback, logic, and experience outside the project, about the impact of different kinds of process. Regards, -- Rowan Collins [IMSoP]