[asterisk-users] (last call for comments) Proposed changes to Asterisk release and support cycles

[Administrator TOOTAI]

Le 09/02/2012 09:49, Administrator TOOTAI a écrit :
> Le 08/02/2012 23:28, Kevin P. Fleming a écrit :
>> On 02/08/2012 04:02 PM, Danny Nicholas wrote:
>>> Not a complaint, per se, just a question.  Why are the LTS versions 
>>> "odd"
>>> (11, 13, 15, etc) and the non-LTS (10, 12, etc) even?   As I read 
>>> the chart,
>>> Digium/Asterisk is committing to a new LTS version every 2 years?
>>
>> Well, the first LTS was Asterisk 1.4 (although we didn't call it an 
>> LTS then). The second LTS was Asterisk 1.8. The third would be 
>> Asterisk 11. It's just a quirk of the version numbering scheme.
>>
>> The proposal is that yes, we'd be committing to producing an LTS 
>> every 2 years, and a standard release in the intervening years.
>>
>
> I agree with Danny. To get thinks back to odd, why not skip the 
> Asterisk 11 version and go straight to 12 for next LTS? Such behavior 
> was already done by going from 1.8 to 10, so one more ... ;-)
>

To clarify, odd for development, even for LTS.

-- 
Daniel