Am Donnerstag 08 April 2021 11:05:48 schrieb Werner Koch via Gnupg-devel:
> We are pleased to announce the availability of a new GnuPG release:
> version 2.3.0.
Congratulations!
As I am trying to spread the word, I am considering how to write about the
status of the release.
https://gnupg.org/download/index.html calls it **devel**
GnuPG (devel) 2.3.0
(and the 2.2.27 "LTS").
In contrast, the text here assumes as least "beta":
> This release marks the start of public testing releases
> eventually leading to a new stable version 2.4.
>
> Although some bugs might linger in the 2.3 versions, they are intended
> to replace the 2.2 series. 2.3 may even be used for production purposes
> if either the risk of minor regressions is acceptable or the new
> features are important.
On the other hand it is "released", and it is okay to use in production,
so it could just be labeled the "current release" (and 2.2 "LTS" in contrast")
However the quote above talks about "public testing releases",
which again more hints towards "release candidate".
My suggestion:
a) give it no label (thus implicitly assuming a regular release)
b) change the download webpage to remove the "(devel)" substring.
Rationale: It is okay for production (under some circumstances)
and this is the main association people have with a release.
It being a point release, will make people cautious that have reason to be
conservative.
Fine by you?
Best Regards,
Bernhard
--
www.intevation.de/~bernhard +49 541 33 508 3-3
Intevation GmbH, Osnabrück, DE; Amtsgericht Osnabrück, HRB 18998
Geschäftsführer Frank Koormann, Bernhard Reiter, Dr. Jan-Oliver Wagner
> We are pleased to announce the availability of a new GnuPG release:
> version 2.3.0.
Congratulations!
As I am trying to spread the word, I am considering how to write about the
status of the release.
https://gnupg.org/download/index.html calls it **devel**
GnuPG (devel) 2.3.0
(and the 2.2.27 "LTS").
In contrast, the text here assumes as least "beta":
> This release marks the start of public testing releases
> eventually leading to a new stable version 2.4.
>
> Although some bugs might linger in the 2.3 versions, they are intended
> to replace the 2.2 series. 2.3 may even be used for production purposes
> if either the risk of minor regressions is acceptable or the new
> features are important.
On the other hand it is "released", and it is okay to use in production,
so it could just be labeled the "current release" (and 2.2 "LTS" in contrast")
However the quote above talks about "public testing releases",
which again more hints towards "release candidate".
My suggestion:
a) give it no label (thus implicitly assuming a regular release)
b) change the download webpage to remove the "(devel)" substring.
Rationale: It is okay for production (under some circumstances)
and this is the main association people have with a release.
It being a point release, will make people cautious that have reason to be
conservative.
Fine by you?
Best Regards,
Bernhard
--
www.intevation.de/~bernhard +49 541 33 508 3-3
Intevation GmbH, Osnabrück, DE; Amtsgericht Osnabrück, HRB 18998
Geschäftsführer Frank Koormann, Bernhard Reiter, Dr. Jan-Oliver Wagner
Attached Files:
-
signature.asc (0.64 KB)