DOC Add minor release policy

[maxime-rainville]

Just documenting the actual process we follow for minor release.

There's nothing really new here aside from the predefined minor release months.

Parent issue

• https://github.com/silverstripeltd/product-issues/issues/766

[maxime-rainville]

@silverstripe/core-team ^ Maybe have a read and let us know if you have feedback or concern with this action plan.

[emteknetnz]

@maxime-rainville Parent issue is on a private repo so people outside of Silverstripe Ltd won't be able to view it

[GuySartorelli]

Is there a reason to target 5.0 and not 4.13 for this change?

[GuySartorelli]

Not answered yet @maxime-rainville: #308 (review)
Also see all unresolved conversations.

[GuySartorelli]

@maxime-rainville you still haven't addressed #308 (review)

For convenience:

Is there a reason to target 5.0 and not 4.13 for this change?

[maxime-rainville]

Is there a reason to target 5.0 and not 4.13 for this change?

In a perfect world, process that don't relate to a specific major would be documented in something in-temporal. Until such time, I think it makes sense to say that the latest major branch is tho source of truth.

[GuySartorelli]

In a perfect world, process that don't relate to a specific major would be documented in something in-temporal. Until such time, I think it makes sense to say that the latest major branch is tho source of truth.

I disagree with that approach. I think any supported documentation should be accurate. Imagine the case where someone is looking at CMS 4 documentation for their CMS 4 project, and comes across something that they think needs to be changed. They're not going to then swap over to the CMS 5 docs to see the contribution guide/etc. They're gonna click on it where it is.

Obviously this doc is a little less important that it be shared across both versions in the same way, because we won't be releasing new minors for CMS 4 - but the principal of the matter and the precedent we set is important here.
I think until we move governance docs somewhere they won't be version gated, which isn't likely to happen until the dot org rebuild is complete, we should make sure our governance doc is always up-to-date for 4.13 and 5.x

It probably does belong in CMS 4 docs regardless though, as it does also speak about security patch windows, which is relevant to CMS 4 users.

[GuySartorelli]

Now that I've put my reasoning there, if you still feel strongly about this being merged only into 5.0, say so and it'll be done.

[maxime-rainville]

I don't care strongly either. I've reset the branch to target 4.13 and cherry pick the commit there.

FYI We'll have to renumber the "fix dependency" page on merge up.