old ports/packages

[Bob Eager]

On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 17:17:57 +0200
Franco Fichtner <franco at lastsummer.de> wrote:

> The initial release was 10.0, which was phased out after a
> year, leaving us no choice but to go 10.1 just two months
> after our initial release in order to receive official security
> updates.  Worst case it takes a few months to adapt to the
> major transition so that's 12 months minus X months of internal
> engineering, depending on your staff expertise.  In that case
> we started in 2014, took us 4 months, that's 6 months including
> the time 10.0 was officially available, so 6 months left for
> support, when you actually start adapting to 10 as soon as it
> comes out.  For many that's a luxury not going to happen.  One
> can blame anyone for starting late, but it's not going to solve
> the real world problem.
> 
> 10.1 went really well.  When 10.2 happened for us in January
> 2016, however, we've already went testing 3 months before and
> had a number of issues that were not being addressed upstream
> for a longer amount of time:

Why not just use odd numbered releases? That's what I do. They have a
longer support cycle.