[geos-devel] PSC Vote: RFC 11 Geos Versioning and EOL Policy - MOTION PASSED

[Regina Obe]

I have put links, expected final dates, and emojis on the download page

 

https://libgeos.org/usage/download/

 

Feel free to change if you don’t like them.

 

Also not sure if it’s worthwhile to add an initial release date or if it would make the page too crowded, so I left that out.

 

Thanks,

Regina

 

From: Regina Obe [mailto:lr at pcorp.us] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2022 10:31 AM
To: 'GEOS Development List' <geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org>
Subject: RE: [geos-devel] PSC Vote: RFC 11 Geos Versioning and EOL Policy - MOTION PASSED

 

Passed with:

 

Regina +1

Paul +1

Martin +1

Dan +1

Sandro – don’t care

 

 

From: geos-devel [mailto:geos-devel-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Baston
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2022 10:18 AM
To: GEOS Development List <geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org> >
Subject: Re: [geos-devel] PSC Vote: RFC 11 Geos Versioning and EOL Policy

 

+1

 

On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 4:59 PM Martin Davis <mtnclimb at gmail.com <mailto:mtnclimb at gmail.com> > wrote:

+1. 

 

On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 11:34 AM Regina Obe <lr at pcorp.us <mailto:lr at pcorp.us> > wrote:

Here is my formal request to vote on:

https://libgeos.org/development/rfcs/rfc11/

To accompany that change we will 

1) Put a link on https://libgeos.org/usage/download/  to that policy.
2) Put in a Final Release Date column on the download page (maybe
color-coded, though not sure how to color code in markdown so maybe we'll
skip that)
Red - past EOL
Yellow - EOL eminent
Not sure it's worth to color code newer

3) For releases not reached EOL yet, set the expected EOL to 3-4 years from
the .0 release.

Not sure what to do with 3.6 and 3.7, both are passed 4 years

3.6.0 was released 2016-10-25 (more than 5 years ago) (Dan mentioned this is
still in Ubuntu LTS 18, which will be eol'd in April 2023), do we wait or
just EOL it now.

3.7.0 was released 2018-09-10  -- about 4 years ago, so I would consider
this on the potential chopping block given the above proposed policy.


Thanks,
Regina







_______________________________________________
geos-devel mailing list
geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org> 
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel

_______________________________________________
geos-devel mailing list
geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org> 
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geos-devel/attachments/20220920/6105c131/attachment.htm>