[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
David, Mike
I can foresee that industry working groups, particularly those with
their own name/brand/logo, may want to have their own Simultaneous
release or none at all.
I think where David was headed makes a lot of sense - there are good
practice things in the requirements for the Simultaneous release that
should be mutual for LTS.
In the same line of thinking, it likely makes sense to move towards
decoupling language & technology specific requirements from the release
& LTS requirements. e.g. Java requirements, C/C++, etc.
Andrew
On 01/12/2012 01:09 PM, Mike Milinkovich wrote:
David,
You're right. This should be included. It is explicitly part of our
thinking.
-----Original Message-----
Should another criteria to be "LTS ready" be "Be part of the yearly
Simultaneous Release"?
It seems many of the presentations about LTS sort of assume it, but it is
not
stated.
I doubt there is any technical reason this is literally required but it
would sure
make thing easier! If not actually required, probably need at least some
reference to it; such as "Be part of the yearly Simultaneous Release (or,
clearly compatible with it)".
Just a suggestion.
