What is the Erlang/OTP release and LTS schedule? - erlang

What is the Erlang/OTP release schedule? How many major versions are released per year, and is there a schedule you can link?
Which versions have long-term support (LTS)?

Since the release of Erlang/OTP 18.0 in June 2015, there has been a major release every year in June, followed by minor releases (x.1, x.2, x.3) in September, December and March. There are also frequent patch packages announced on the erlang-announce mailing list.
I'm pretty sure this release schedule was announced on the erlang-questions mailing list, but I can't find it now...
There are, strictly speaking, no LTS versions. The documentation on supported releases says:
In general, bugs are only fixed on the latest release, and new features are introduced in the upcoming release that is under development. However, when we, due to internal reasons, fix bugs on older releases, these will be available and announced as well.

Related

What Rails versions receive security updates upon Rails 7.0's release?

Security support for Rails is described on this page: https://guides.rubyonrails.org/maintenance_policy.html
As I read this, my expectation is that when Rails 7.0 is released, likely in April 2021, the 5.x series of Rails will no longer receive security-related updates and bug fixes. Is this correct?
More importantly, upon release of Rails 7.0, it seems like only the last minor release of Rails 6.x (currently, 6.1) will receive security updates. To be explicit about this, when 7.0 is released, I expect that Rails 6.0 (not being the current minor release of the 6.x series) will no longer receive security updates. Is this expectation correct, or will the 6.0 minor version also receive security updates after a 7.x release?
Any further definitive guidance or clarification on how this works would be helpful, as the linked documentation above is unclear, and this directly impacts the security of customers I support. (Preemptively, I am not interested in 3rd party security support of older Rails versions.) Background: I use gems that are as of yet incompatible with 6.1, but are supported in 6.0.

Will there be a Community Edition for Embarcadero C++Builder 10.4?

Does anyone know if, and when, there will be a Community Edition of C++Builder 10.4 that would enable us to experiment with the latest version of the compiler and the VCL?
I have had a lot of problems trying to upgrade 10.3 Community Edition with all the patches, and am really not sure what I have ended up with. Some of the improvements in 10.4 sound impressive, and it would be nice to start from something clean.
The Feature Matrix for 10.4.2 includes a footnote on some of the pages that states "Community edition planned for a future 10.4.x release. Current available Community Edition version is 10.3.3." So that appears to be the official position from Embarcadero.
Strangely the Matrix then outlines and contrasts the features of the Professional/Community Editions with the Architect/Enterprise editions in two columns without indicating the differences between the Professional Edition version at 10.4.2 and the Community Edition at version 10.3.3 - so it’s not much use to see what the differences are between the various Editions and the current Community Edition, and thus what we are missing.
I just hope that the use of 10.4.x doesn’t indicate a move towards using Roman numerals for point releases!
At the time of this writing (Feb 10 2021), no information has been provided by Embarcadero regarding any release of a 10.4 Community Edition.

Serilog Version Numbers

I'm looking at different logging frameworks and it seems like Serilog is quite mature.
I am confused by all the different version numbers. How do I know what sinks belong to what versions of the core framework? Why aren't the version numbers standardized?
Serilog core hasn't broken backward binary compatibility since 2.0 in June 2016 (a long time ago, in .NET terms), so all maintained sinks work with the latest Serilog core package.
You should just need to pick the latest stable version of Serilog and of each sink you wish to use, and everything will just work.
(Sinks may have other dependencies that overlap and conflict, but this would be unusual to encounter.)

Turbo Power - SongBeamer or SourceForge for Delphi XE?

It looks like the SongBeamer site which put up some nice ports for the TurboPower OpenSource projects for Delphi 2009+ are now being outdated with some recent updates in SourceForge. But, then again, maybe not? Which versions are best used with Delphi XE?
I'm most interested in Abbrevia, LockBox, and Async Pro. It looks like Abbrevia-SourceForge, AsynPro-SongBeamer, LockBox..?
I am the "owner" of the Turbopower projects on SourceForge. They are all in various states of development, but the most popular ones are XE ready.
I confess that I don't know the exact state of any individual project, but I can say that SourceForge is the best place to get the most recent and up to date "official" version.
As far as I know, the SourceForge versions of the projects are currently actively being maintained, under the direction of Nick Hodges.
Abbrevia is much better on SourceForge. The SongBeamer version was based on unstable code from mid-2008. I started maintaining the project in 2009 and the official 3.05 stable release had a lot of cleanup and fixes after that. v4.0 was released in March 2011, and added new features, include full support for Unicode filenames in zips, bzip2 archives, and decompression support for most of the new zipx compression algorithms (LZMA, bzip2, PPMd, WavPack). The current Subversion trunk also has Zip64 support and much better splitting/spanning support.
Async Pro appears to be better on SourceForge, but it's a bit of a mix. Officially only a handful of components have been updated to Unicode. In the SourceForge release the admin added $IFDEFs to keep the remaining files from compiling, while on SongBeamer they may still compile but might not be correct. There have been a few releases on SongBeamer since the SourceForge 5.0 release, so there may be some fixes not in the official release, but it's not based on the 5.0 release, so they're both missing stuff.
LockBox 2 is better on SongBeamer. The SourceForge version hasn't been updated with Unicode support at all. The SourceForge site does include a LockBox 3 project that supports Delphi 2007 through Delphi XE, but it's entirely new, incompatible code, so the only thing they share is the name. It is being updated though, unlike LB2.
Orpheus is better on SourceForge and incorporates all of the fixes from SongBeamer.
Office Partner has had a Unicode update posted in the SourceForge project's forums, but doesn't have a maintainer, so it's not official released or in the SVN repository. Not available on SongBeamer.
OnGuard and SysTools are the same on both sites.
ShellShock has Unicode support in the SourceForge Subversion repository.
XML Partner has the SongBeamer code committed to the SourceForge Subversion repository.
TP Essentials is better on SongBeamer.
The rest of the TurboPower projects SourceForge projects are dead.
Stay away from LockBox. Version 2.x in now really outdated (but for very simple cryptography needs), while version 3.x developer has somehow "stolen" the LockBox name, writing another library not compatible, and its quality doesn't look good.
Moreover IMHO he has no rights to change the license, only the Initial Developer - Turbo Power - can relicense under different ones, if he didn't like MPL 1.1 he could have created his own library without taking Turbo Power's Lockbox name and Sourceforge project. Thereby you may end up using a library with an invalid license, especially if you plan to use it under GPL terms.
If you have needs for good cryptography look elsewhere.
The sourceforge version of AsyncPro doesn't add the BCB components either - these seem to have suffered a lot since TP opensourced. I had to build packages for this a couple of times to support various versions of RAD studio. Haven't checked the latest songbeamer build.

Will TFS 2010 Beta 1 upgrade to the final product?

Will TFS 2010 Beta 1 upgrade to the final product?
I understand that there will be some issues, maybe a re-install even, but how does it compare to the installation drama that TFS 2008 had?
TFS 2010 Beta 1 is an early beta designed for standalone use when testing out the product. You shouldn't use it to run a production project and upgrading the Beta 1 server to later beta's or the final release is not supported by Microsoft.
This is the same as what happened with the early beta's of TFS 2005 and TFS 2008. When Microsoft offers a beta of TFS with a "go-live" license, that is usually the signal that an upgrade path of sorts will be provided from the beta to the released product.
Regarding the installation experience, having played with TFS 2010 for a while now, it is clear that Microsoft have spent a significant amount of effort on the installation and it is a lot smoother and more flexible than in previous releases. That said, you still need to ensure that you have your pre-requisites (i.e. IIS and SQL Server 2008) installed in the correct way. As ever with TFS, be sure to follow the install guide carefully.
Personally, I'd recommend testing out TFS 2010 Beta 1 in a Virtual Machine for now. You probably also want to install the client side Visual Studio Team Suite in virtual machines unless you are prepared to rebuild the machine that you install Beta 1 onto.
Brian Harry indicated that moving from Beta 1 to Beta 2 will likely have some hicups:
http://blogs.msdn.com/bharry/archive/2009/05/18/vs-vsts-2010-and-net-4-0-beta-1-is-available.aspx
If going from Beta 1 to Beta 2 will be difficult then going from Beta 1 to Release will probably have problems too.
I am betting it will have better support that a CTP does, but MS Betas frequently have "Upgrade Blues".
I would recommend installing on a temporary Virtual Machine for now.
I would guess that there won't be a seamless upgrade process. There wasn't during the VS2008 release cycle, and there isn't for the Win7 cycle (I know they're two separate divisions, I'm just pointing out that large public pre-releases from Microsoft don't seem to have good seamless upgrade experiences).
All beta release does upgrade the Final Product, otherwise they would have called final release :)

Resources