Node.js LTS meeting 15 May 2017

Present

All: No objections

Myles: I’m not sure we need to declare a support statement at all, we definitely don’t want to call it maintenance, that conflates it with LTS maintenance mode, which is different.
Sam: if we describe odd-numbered as stable then do we need maintenance?
Myles: we shouldn’t call odd-numbered releases stable, they are current because they don’t have a support process.
Myles: We could say: “After the next Current release line comes out, there will be no more scheduled releases. Further releases will be agreed on a case-by-case basis.”
Michael: how about: "An odd-numbered major release will cease to be actively updated when the subsequent even-numbered major release is cut."
All: agreed
Myles: I think the bigger issue is that we are inconsistent about how stable current is, and whether it’s recommended for more general use.
Myles to raise CTC issue

Myles: I think the release team should include the LTS team, and a team of people who do releases.
Myles: Also the current Release WG should have meetings, even infrequent ones, that would help us stay on top of our release process.
Michael: I think it’s still good to have a releasers team under the proposed Release WG that actually handles the release process, so that we can have a wider Release team that aren’t required to all have release access.
Jeremiah: Yeah, there probably will be a lot of overlap between what the current Release and LTS teams talk about.
Jeremiah: If we do this, then the Release team might not all need to have the responsibility to do releases.
Myles: So maybe the rule should be that to add someone to the releasers team requires signoff from the CTC.
Michael: We need to make sure the other Release team members are on board.
Michael to write up a first draft of the proposal, Myles can review before the issue is created.