=item *
-We "officially" support the two most recent stable release series. 5.14.x
-and earlier are now out of support. As of the release of 5.20.0, we will
-"officially" end support for Perl 5.16.x, other than providing security
+We "officially" support the two most recent stable release series. 5.16.x
+and earlier are now out of support. As of the release of 5.22.0, we will
+"officially" end support for Perl 5.18.x, other than providing security
updates as described below.
=item *
years and decades, but not at the expense of our user community.
Existing syntax and semantics should only be marked for destruction in
-very limited circumstances. If a given language feature's continued
-inclusion in the language will cause significant harm to the language
-or prevent us from making needed changes to the runtime, then it may
-be considered for deprecation.
-
-Any language change which breaks backward-compatibility should be able to
-be enabled or disabled lexically. Unless code at a given scope declares
-that it wants the new behavior, that new behavior should be disabled.
-Which backward-incompatible changes are controlled implicitly by a
-'use v5.x.y' is a decision which should be made by the pumpking in
-consultation with the community.
-
-When a backward-incompatible change can't be toggled lexically, the decision
-to change the language must be considered very, very carefully. If it's
-possible to move the old syntax or semantics out of the core language
-and into XS-land, that XS module should be enabled by default unless
-the user declares that they want a newer revision of Perl.
+very limited circumstances. If they are believed to be very rarely used,
+stand in the way of actual improvement to the Perl language or perl
+interpreter, and if affected code can be easily updated to continue
+working, they may be considered for removal. When in doubt, caution
+dictates that we will favor backward compatibility. When a feature is
+deprecated, a statement of reasoning describing the decision process
+will be posted, and a link to it will be provided in the relevant
+perldelta documents.
+
+Using a lexical pragma to enable or disable legacy behavior should be
+considered when appropriate, and in the absence of any pragma legacy
+behavior should be enabled. Which backward-incompatible changes are
+controlled implicitly by a 'use v5.x.y' is a decision which should be
+made by the pumpking in consultation with the community.
Historically, we've held ourselves to a far higher standard than
backward-compatibility -- bugward-compatibility. Any accident of
New syntax and semantics which don't break existing language constructs
and syntax have a much lower bar. They merely need to prove themselves
-to be useful, elegant, well designed, and well tested.
+to be useful, elegant, well designed, and well tested. In most cases,
+these additions will be marked as I<experimental> for some time. See
+below for more on that.
=head2 Terminology
=head1 MAINTENANCE BRANCHES
+New releases of maintenance branches should only contain changes that fall into
+one of the "acceptable" categories set out below, but must not contain any
+changes that fall into one of the "unacceptable" categories. (For example, a
+fix for a crashing bug must not be included if it breaks binary compatibility.)
+
+It is not necessary to include every change meeting these criteria, and in
+general the focus should be on addressing security issues, crashing bugs,
+regressions and serious installation issues. The temptation to include a
+plethora of minor changes that don't affect the installation or execution of
+perl (e.g. spelling corrections in documentation) should be resisted in order
+to reduce the overall risk of overlooking something. The intention is to
+create maintenance releases which are both worthwhile and which users can have
+full confidence in the stability of. (A secondary concern is to avoid burning
+out the maint-pumpking or overwhelming other committers voting on changes to be
+included (see L</"Getting changes into a maint branch"> below).)
+
+The following types of change may be considered acceptable, as long as they do
+not also fall into any of the "unacceptable" categories set out below:
+
=over
=item *
-New releases of maint should contain as few changes as possible.
-If there is any question about whether a given patch might merit
-inclusion in a maint release, then it almost certainly should not
-be included.
+Patches that fix CVEs or security issues. These changes should
+be run through the perl5-security-report@perl.org mailing list
+rather than applied directly.
=item *
-Portability fixes, such as changes to Configure and the files in
-hints/ are acceptable. Ports of Perl to a new platform, architecture
-or OS release that involve changes to the implementation are NOT
-acceptable.
+Patches that fix crashing bugs, assertion failures and
+memory corruption but which do not otherwise change perl's
+functionality or negatively impact performance.
=item *
-Acceptable documentation updates are those that correct factual errors,
-explain significant bugs or deficiencies in the current implementation,
-or fix broken markup.
+Patches that fix regressions in perl's behavior relative to previous
+releases, no matter how old the regression, since some people may
+upgrade from very old versions of perl to the latest version.
=item *
-Patches that add new warnings or errors or deprecate features
-are not acceptable.
+Patches that fix bugs in features that were new in the corresponding 5.x.0
+stable release.
=item *
-Patches that fix crashing bugs that do not otherwise change Perl's
-functionality or negatively impact performance are acceptable.
+Patches that fix anything which prevents or seriously impacts the build
+or installation of perl.
=item *
-Patches that fix CVEs or security issues are acceptable, but should
-be run through the perl5-security-report@perl.org mailing list
-rather than applied directly.
+Portability fixes, such as changes to Configure and the files in
+the hints/ folder.
=item *
-Patches that fix regressions in perl's behavior relative to previous
-releases are acceptable.
+Minimal patches that fix platform-specific test failures.
+
+=item *
+
+Documentation updates that correct factual errors, explain significant
+bugs or deficiencies in the current implementation, or fix broken markup.
=item *
Updates to dual-life modules should consist of minimal patches to
-fix crashing or security issues (as above).
+fix crashing bugs or security issues (as above). Any changes made to
+dual-life modules for which CPAN is canonical should be coordinated with
+the upstream author.
+
+=back
+
+The following types of change are NOT acceptable:
+
+=over
=item *
-Minimal patches that fix platform-specific test failures or build or
-installation issues are acceptable. When these changes are made
-to dual-life modules for which CPAN is canonical, any changes
-should be coordinated with the upstream author.
+Patches that break binary compatibility. (Please talk to a pumpking.)
=item *
-New versions of dual-life modules should NOT be imported into maint.
-Those belong in the next stable series.
+Patches that add or remove features.
+
+=item *
+
+Patches that add new warnings or errors or deprecate features.
=item *
-Patches that add or remove features are not acceptable.
+Ports of Perl to a new platform, architecture or OS release that
+involve changes to the implementation.
=item *
-Patches that break binary compatibility are not acceptable. (Please
-talk to a pumpking.)
+New versions of dual-life modules should NOT be imported into maint.
+Those belong in the next stable series.
=back
+If there is any question about whether a given patch might merit
+inclusion in a maint release, then it almost certainly should not
+be included.
=head2 Getting changes into a maint branch
other committers respond to the list giving their assent. (This policy
applies to current and former pumpkings, as well as other committers.)
+Other voting mechanisms may be used instead, as long as the same number of
+votes is gathered in a transparent manner. Specifically, proposals of
+which changes to cherry-pick must be visible to everyone on perl5-porters
+so that the views of everyone interested may be heard.
+
+It is not necessary for voting to be held on cherry-picking perldelta
+entries associated with changes that have already been cherry-picked, nor
+for the maint-pumpking to obtain votes on changes required by the
+F<Porting/release_managers_guide.pod> where such changes can be applied by
+the means of cherry-picking from blead.
+
=head1 CONTRIBUTED MODULES
sarcasm. It is not enough to be factual. You must also be civil. Responding
in kind to incivility is not acceptable.
+While civility is required, kindness is encouraged; if you have any doubt about
+whether you are being civil, simply ask yourself, "Am I being kind?" and aspire
+to that.
+
If the list moderators tell you that you are not being civil, carefully
-consider how your words have appeared before responding in any way. You may
-protest, but repeated protest in the face of a repeatedly reaffirmed decision
-is not acceptable.
+consider how your words have appeared before responding in any way. Were they
+kind? You may protest, but repeated protest in the face of a repeatedly
+reaffirmed decision is not acceptable.
Unacceptable behavior will result in a public and clearly identified warning.
-Repeated unacceptable behavior will result in removal from the mailing list.
-The first removal is for one month. Subsequent removals will double in length.
-After six months with no warning, a user's ban length is reset. Removals, like
-warnings, are public.
+Repeated unacceptable behavior will result in removal from the mailing list and
+revocation of rights to update rt.perl.org. The first removal is for one
+month. Subsequent removals will double in length. After six months with no
+warning, a user's ban length is reset. Removals, like warnings, are public.
The list of moderators will be public knowledge. At present, it is:
Aaron Crane, Andy Dougherty, Ricardo Signes, Steffen Müller.
https://perl5.git.perl.org / perl5.git / blobdiff