From: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Git v3.0 timeline, was Re: What's cooking in git.git (Sep 2026, #08)
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2026 14:29:01 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <306e7563-c356-dc59-c14a-ff8e99a948ae@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqpky346fr.fsf@gitster.g>
Hi Junio,
On Wed, 23 Sep 2026, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> As I wrote, after the current cycle ends at the end of this month, a
> 10-to-12-week cycle including the end-of-year slowness would mean the
> next cycle, 2.98, will end at the end of this year. Extrapolating
> from there, 2.99 will be March 2027.
>
> The consensus in the room was that we want to use 2.99 as a signal
> that something big is coming, so there needs to be some lead time
> between 2.99 and 3.0 for "advertisement". This lead time between
> 2.99 and 3.0 does not have to be the usual 8-to-12-week full release
> cycle.
>
> I do not think there was a firm agreement on the date for 2.99.1 and
> 3.0. Potential factors mentioned in the room included that we may
> want to match the LTS release schedule of major distributions. My
> preference would be to give a month after 2.99 to apply only
> accumulated bugfixes and nothing else, and tag it as 2.99.1, which
> means 2.99.1 would be April 2027.
>
> The contents of 3.0 should be identical to 2.99.1 except that
> breaking changes are enabled in 3.0 while they are disabled in
> 2.99.1. Volunteers can run the 2.99.x series indefinitely to help
> LTS distributions.
>
> At the release engineering level, I am very tempted to keep the
> WITH_BREAKING_CHANGES Makefile knob in the 3.0 release in order to
> keep the differences between 2.99.1 and 3.0 to an absolute minimum,
> and then remove the "dead code" that is used when
> WITH_BREAKING_CHANGES is not enabled from the 3.x series at our
> leisure.
>
> So the above is what I have in mind, shaped mostly around the
> consensus at the Contributors' Summit (or at least how I understand
> what the consensus was), with my preference filling in what was not
> firmly decided in the room.
Thank you so much! This will make it much easier for me to plan out the
Git for Windows roadmap, such as switching to Rust-based builds and
integrating Git Credential Manager v3.0.
Ciao,
Johannes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-24 12:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-22 0:11 What's cooking in git.git (Sep 2026, #08) Junio C Hamano
2026-09-22 8:11 ` kh/format-patch-range-diff-notes Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-09-22 13:25 ` Git v3.0 timeline, was Re: What's cooking in git.git (Sep 2026, #08) Johannes Schindelin
2026-09-22 13:49 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-09-22 17:06 ` Johannes Schindelin
2026-09-24 3:56 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-09-24 4:30 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-09-24 12:29 ` Johannes Schindelin [this message]
2026-09-24 17:00 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-09-24 18:08 ` Ramsay Jones
2026-09-22 18:44 ` My summary of the Git Contributors' Summit 2026, was " Johannes Schindelin
2026-09-23 11:55 ` Daniele Sassoli
2026-09-24 12:31 ` Johannes Schindelin
2026-09-25 9:53 ` Luca Milanesio
2026-09-23 12:52 ` D. Ben Knoble
2026-09-23 14:22 ` Security mailing list & process, was Re: My summary of the Git Contributors' Summit 2026 Toon Claes
2026-09-24 12:38 ` Johannes Schindelin
2026-09-23 14:40 ` Git Contributor' summit: Documentation, was: Re: My summary of the Git Contributors' Summit 2026, was Re: Git v3.0 timeline, was Re: What's cooking in git.git (Sep 2026, #08) Toon Claes
2026-09-23 15:15 ` Git Contributor' summit: Documentation, Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=306e7563-c356-dc59-c14a-ff8e99a948ae@gmx.de \
--to=johannes.schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox