New informational JEP: 14: The Tip & Tail Model of Library Development

[Karsten Silz]

> On 31 Oct 2024, at 22:03, Alex Buckley <alex.buckley at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> On 10/31/2024 4:44 AM, Karsten Silz wrote:
>> To me, stability depends on the answer to this question: When and how do I have to upgrade when I want to stay up-to-date with tail trains only? I think the JEP does not mandate when tail trains appear or how long they live, which does not give me the stability I want.
> 
> There are tens of thousands of libraries in the Java ecosystem. It is plainly impossible to mandate anything about the scheduling or longevity of tail trains. All the JEP does is explain why tail trains should exist in the first place.

I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear: I did not say that the JEP should mandate release cycles. I'm saying that predictable release cycles give me stability. "Tip & Tail" tells me what I get from a library, the predictable release cycle lets me plan when I get it. I do not know how common my preferences are.

>> The first real-life example in the JEP does: In Java, I either upgrade every six months or every 2-5+ years, depending on my JDK distribution’s LTS  duration. That’s perfect stability to me.
> 
> If you're running a JDK LTS version, you should be upgrading every three months. For example, so far in 2024, a JDK 17 user should have upgraded to 17.0.10, 17.0.11, 17.0.12, and 17.0.13.

Thank you for pointing out my mistake! I should have said, "I either switch tail trains every six months or every 2-5+ years". 


Karsten
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/attachments/20241103/94f4bfb7/attachment.htm>