[cdwg] Summary of telecon on July 26, and review of information for the board

[Peter Jones]

Thanks for writing this up. I think that my only suggestion alteration 
would be with this section. I think that my characterization of this 
section would be that any additional maintenance release would be on the 
roadmap but clearly marked as an ad-hoc maintenance release rather than 
the codeline itself being the official maintenance release stream (with 
a succession of pre-scheduled releases).  I think that the confusion 
here is that the expectation is that ad-hoc releases would occur as 
needed and likely not have much lead time, as opposed to releases on the 
maintenance release stream, which we would know about sometime ahead.

On 12-07-27 12:03 PM, Christopher J. Morrone wrote:
> <snip>

> There was some discussion among folks who intend to use 2.3 in 
> production that it would be nice to have a "mini-maintenance" branch 
> to hold them over until 2.4 is released.  Note that this branch would 
> not be supported for a significant period of time, likely only a few 
> month.  This will happen if there is sufficient demand and resources 
> applied, but to avoid confusion among the broader community we will 
> not be advertising this release.  We will also try to avoid using the 
> term "maintenance" in association with 2.3 to avoid expectations of 
> long term support if that branch becomes a reality.