Post by @carlton@fosstodon.org

2023-10-26 10:36 UTC

In the latest @djangochat, @nessita discussed how her non-Django friends were underwhelmed by the features in #Django **5.0** — the major version is meant to mean some big breaking change. @wsvincent has discussed numerous times how the X.0, X.1, X.2 LTS, Y.0, … cycle is confusing. But how could we change it? The X.2 tells you WHICH ONE is the LTS. The 24 month cycle means that if we went CalVer (say) the .4 would always be the LTS, so 23.4 (4.2) 25.4 (5.2) and so on.

Replies (4)

@carlton@fosstodon.org 2023-10-26 10:38

@djangochat @nessita @wsvincent It’s just an idea to stimulate your thought, rather than an actual suggestion, but… Why CalVer? Well, we don’t really do Major versions, 5.0 could just have well have been 4.3, and Django release schedule IS timebased… That I ❤️ CalVer is entirely incidental 😜

Open ##1593850
@sarahboyce@mastodon.social 2023-10-26 10:43

@carlton @djangochat @nessita @wsvincent (🪱 can of worms warning) do we need to implement an LTS process? I find Django upgrades very painless. Maybe enough trust is built that they are no longer required?

Open ##1593866
@kevinrenskers@hachyderm.io 2023-10-26 11:31

@carlton why not use actual semver? Why does the .2 version have to be the LTS one? Why have LTS at all?

Open ##1593880
@cbgrey@mastodon.social 2023-10-28 12:11

@carlton @djangochat @nessita @wsvincent I'm a fan of CalVer as well so if I were choosing, that's what I would pick. Incrementing the year gives a natural feeling of advancement without making it feel like every cycle needs a big, momentous, breaking change. Where do I vote? 😃

Open ##1593884