Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Clarification about the maintenance dates for LTS versions #9

Open
stof opened this issue Mar 25, 2020 · 7 comments
Open

Clarification about the maintenance dates for LTS versions #9

stof opened this issue Mar 25, 2020 · 7 comments

Comments

@stof
Copy link

stof commented Mar 25, 2020

The plan explains in the readme says that a LTS moves to maintenance mode (fixing only critical things) 6 months after the release and reaches end-of-life 6 months later (meaning 1 year after the release).
How does this interact with the release of the next major version ? AFAICT, there is no time-base schedule for the new active major version. If this version takes time to go out, it might actually give very little time to migrate from the LTS version (being the current release) to the new major version once this one goes out. Shouldn't the transition to maintenance mode take into account the release date of the next major version, to ensure that project can benefit from this 6 months maintenance window to perform their migration to the new major version ? In the current process, if releases 5.0 takes 5 months, projects only have 1 month of maintenance to migrate before the end-of-life.

A proposal could be to change the definition of the maintenance start to be "at the release of the new major version or 6 months after the LTS start, whatever happens last".
What do you think ?

@cavias
Copy link

cavias commented Jul 8, 2020

I don't think the dates in this repo are accurate in any way. Even the blog still announces a v4.5.1 release to fix a couple of regressions and continue to bridge the gap between v4 and v5, even though 4's supposed to be in "critical fixes only" maintenance LTS.

Safe to say the info in this repo is inaccurate. Although ending support for 4 without 5 being released (or within a month of it) would be absolutely hilarious.

It does make me wonder; what's the point of this repo if nobody is bothered to do anything with it?

@stof
Copy link
Author

stof commented Jul 9, 2020

then I suggest that these dates are removed an replaced by TBD. Having an official repo showing inaccurate release schedules is worse than showing that the dates are not defined IMO.

@XhmikosR
Copy link
Member

XhmikosR commented Nov 27, 2020

Sorry, we got out of track. Our plan is to keep v4 support for a long time, at least for 2 years after v5 is out.

At this point, I too wonder if we should just nuke this repo since we don't have any kind of automation for it.

@kjeyakanthan
Copy link

Hi. Has there been any change to the support of v4? it looks like its going out of support in November this year.

@jee-mj
Copy link

jee-mj commented Feb 16, 2023

needs an update as v4 is EOL now, and v5 has no information regarding.

@jcimoch
Copy link

jcimoch commented May 18, 2023

Not sure where to ask but is there any deadline for bootstrap 5.3 release? I would like to use color-modes in production but current release is still alpha

@julien-deramond
Copy link
Member

Not sure where to ask

Our GitHub Discussions space is the right place (for the next time :) )

is there any deadline for bootstrap 5.3 release?

It's gonna be really soon but we don't have a precise release date since we're all maintaining the project in our spare time. We are currently reviewing the latest PRs related to this version, and synchronizing our agendas in order to release the version. I don't want to announce dates, speak in the name of the other members of the core team, and put some pressure on ourselves, but I think we're almost ready and hope it's going to be released this month.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants