Breaking changes

Dennis Clarke dclarke at
Wed May 23 01:40:03 CEST 2018

>>> How about announcing an end-of-life date for 1.4 that
>>> is in the future (say, by 3 to 6 months)?
>> Too fast. Think 12 months as a minimum. There is prod code
>> out there running for years and a timeline that allows proper
>> project schedule/costing/testing would be better.
> If the announced end-of-life is 12 months, then people will complain for
> 9 months, and maybe start working on migrating during the last 3 months.

Not interested.

> I mean, I'm still seeing people actively developing python2 code bases
> without even thinking of migrating to python3 *now*, and retirement was
> initially announced for 2015…

off topic.

> The longer you leave people with maintenance, the longer they will want
> maintenance past the deadline.

[1] Then a service org should exist that charges fees.

> I think 3-6 months is more than enough, and if people can't manage to
> update their production code in this time frame 

Perhaps you don't understand the complexity of a multi-tier prod env
with many architectures and vendors and a lot of transaction sensitive
code in place.


ps: see [1] as a purchase order happens real fast sometimes with the
          right people involved. If Bruce Schneier says $250k then fine
          it gets done. Business as usual.

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list