Blog: Evolving the Node.js Release Schedule #8631
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,165 @@ | ||
| --- | ||
| date: '2026-04-01T00:00:00.000Z' | ||
| category: announcements | ||
| title: Evolving the Node.js Release Schedule | ||
| layout: blog-post | ||
| author: Node.js Releasers | ||
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| Starting with 27.x, Node.js will move from two major releases per year to one. | ||
| This post explains what's changing, why, and what it means for users. For the | ||
| full discussion and background, see [nodejs/Release#1113](https://github.com/nodejs/Release/issues/1113). | ||
|
|
||
| **TL;DR:** If you already only upgrade to LTS versions, little changes beyond | ||
| version numbering. LTS support windows remain similar, and now every release | ||
| becomes LTS. | ||
UlisesGascon marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
|
||
| **Library authors:** Please integrate Alpha releases to your CI as early as possible; | ||
| if you only test on LTS releases, you will not be able to report bugs before they | ||
| affect your users. | ||
|
|
||
UlisesGascon marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
| ## Why This Change | ||
UlisesGascon marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
|
||
| The current release schedule is 10 years old. It was created during the io.js | ||
| merger to balance the needs of a growing ecosystem. As one contributor put it at | ||
| the time, it was "a guess of what enterprises would need." | ||
|
|
||
| We now have a decade of data showing how people actually use Node.js: | ||
|
|
||
| - Odd-numbered releases see minimal adoption. Most users wait for Long-Term Support. | ||
| - The odd/even distinction confuses newcomers. | ||
| - Many organizations skip odd releases entirely, upgrading only to LTS versions. | ||
|
|
||
| We also recognize that enterprises need predictability. The new schedule is | ||
| designed to be well-defined, so teams can plan upgrades and allocate resources | ||
| accordingly. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Volunteer Sustainability | ||
|
|
||
| Node.js is maintained primarily by volunteers. While some contributors receive sponsorship, most | ||
| of the work (reviewing Pull Requests, handling security issues, cutting | ||
| releases, backporting fixes) is done by people in their spare time. | ||
|
|
||
| Managing security releases across four or five active release lines has become | ||
| difficult to sustain. Each additional line increases backporting complexity. By | ||
| reducing the number of concurrent release lines, we can focus on better | ||
| supporting the releases people actually use. | ||
|
|
||
| ## What's Changing | ||
|
|
||
| As of October 2026: | ||
|
|
||
| - **One major release per year** (April), with LTS promotion in October. | ||
| - **Every release becomes LTS**. No more odd/even distinction - Node.js 27 will become LTS. | ||
| - **Alpha channel replaces odd-numbered releases** for early testing. | ||
| - **Version numbers align with the year of the first Current release and transition to LTS**: 27.0.0 in 2027, 28.0.0 in 2028. | ||
| - **Reduced Releasers' burden**. | ||
|
|
||
| ### New Schedule | ||
|
|
||
| | Phase | Duration | Description | | ||
| | ------- | --------- | ----------------------------------------------- | | ||
| | Alpha | 5 months | Oct to Mar. Early testing, semver-major allowed | | ||
| | Current | 6 months | Apr to Oct. Stabilization | | ||
| | LTS | 29 months | Long-term support with security fixes | | ||
| | EOL | Infinity | The project no longer provides any support | | ||
UlisesGascon marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
|
||
| Total support: 35 months from release to [End of Life (EOL)](https://nodejs.org/en/about/eol). | ||
|
|
||
| ### About the Alpha Channel | ||
|
|
||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Sorry to stir up trouble here but... If the goal is to invite library authors to integrate Alpha releases into their CI, the term "Alpha" is... bad. Nobody outside the Node inner circle has any idea how much or how little the details of release channels will change, so they cannot know how they should interpret terminology. If the proposed "Alpha" channel is intended to replace odd-numbered Current releases, it's a misleading name. The word "alpha" has strong connotations with decades of precedent that contradict such usage. I doubt many people would expect "alpha" releases to be tested through Canary in the Goldmine. For a very mature project like Node, I suspect Nightly builds from main are closer to what most think of as "alpha" software. Today's odd-numbered Current releases are more equivalent to release candidates or at least beta versions. If someone from a Java background just starting serious work with Node sees the term "alpha," without knowing this history or context they might think "buggy prototype" and ignore it completely. Yet the purpose of this channel is to attract attention from library authors, right? The term "beta" tells library authors it's time for testing without having to read a blog post. Was that term avoided deliberately, perhaps to allow more wiggle room for occasional buggy releases in this channel? I suppose "testing" would be misleading, since although this is meant for testing of libraries, the subsequent channel is also meant for testing, by end-user developers before LTS for production. Maybe the best option is already right under everyone's noses from CITGM: call this channel "Canary." I think the non-native English speaker concern is less relevant here, since library authors already have to deal with more troublesome terminology anyway (and probably get more practice speaking English). The biggest precedent most people will have for the term "canary" is the React channel used by Next.js. That's probably an acceptable association, since it roughly matches what the experience will be for Node: generally stable, but expect occasional breakage or bugs. The name "Canary" avoids any "flaky prototype" connotations of "alpha," yet appropriately warns people not to expect reliable stability either. After "Canary" to attract library authors, "Preview" would attract attention from early adopters (as opposed to those who stay on the older LTS). Imagine the viewpoint of Java, C#, Go, Rust, C++, Python and PHP developers, and hope for a match between their natural expectations and the future release channels being proposed for Node. I suspect "Canary" to "Preview" to "LTS" is less confusing or misleading than many other possibilities.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's not the intention, Alpha releases can be very different from Current releases as we can ship semver-majors on it. I wouldn't be opposed to a different term, but Beta or Canary doesn't seem different from Alpha in my experience - all of them tell the same: It's an experimental version, subject to break. There was a problem hiding this comment. This is a direct quote from the blog post draft:
So presumably that wording should be adjusted? I think this perception of terminology is a difference between experts and everybody else. When you reach a certain level of expertise, you realize there isn't really a fundamental difference between categories like "alpha" or "beta" or whatever. But outside that circle of expertise, those words have a lot more subjective impact. I think "alpha" has stronger implications than experts realize.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. I personally think Alpha is also fine, it clearly communicates that the releases may still contain breaking changes, and that folks shouldn't rely on them for day-to-day use. We're explicitly stating that library authors are encouraged to test against these releases, whatever their perception of Alpha may be. If there is really that much concern about the specific word being used, I could see Canary being a fine alternative, as it even more directly has connotations to being a release that we want library authors and such to test.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes. Can you adjust? @UlisesGascon |
||
| The Alpha channel replaces odd-numbered releases. Alpha releases are signed, | ||
| tagged, and tested through [CITGM](https://github.com/nodejs/citgm). CITGM (Canary in the Goldmine) is a tool we | ||
| maintain that runs the test suite of major open-source packages on the upcoming | ||
| version of Node.js, which can let us detect ecosystem breakage and notify the | ||
| package authors ahead of the release. | ||
|
|
||
| This is different from [Nightly builds](https://nodejs.org/download/nightly/), which remain | ||
| available as automated untested builds from `main` – Alpha releases may not contain all changes from | ||
| `main`, a change may be not included in an Alpha release if: | ||
|
|
||
| - during Pull Request review, reviewers add a label requesting the change to not be backported | ||
| (e.g. if an API is getting runtime deprecated in an Alpha release, the change actually removing | ||
| that API should not land until the next release line). | ||
| - during the Alpha release preparation, the releaser ultimately decides which commits actually make the | ||
| release (e.g. if a dependency update contains a major bug). | ||
|
|
||
| **Who it's for:** Library authors and CI pipelines testing compatibility with | ||
| upcoming breaking changes. Not intended for production use. | ||
|
|
||
| **What to expect:** | ||
|
|
||
| - Semver-major changes may land during this phase. | ||
| - Releases are signed and tagged (unlike nightly). | ||
| - API may change between releases. | ||
| - The release cadence is flexible; the Release Team will determine the timing | ||
| and frequency of Alpha releases based on the volume of changes and project needs. | ||
|
|
||
| **Why:** Provides early feedback on breaking changes with quality gates that | ||
| Nightly builds lack. Also allows landing V8 updates earlier in the cycle. | ||
|
|
||
| The rules for shipping semver-major commits in Alpha versions will be defined by | ||
| the Release Team and documented in the [Release repository](https://github.com/nodejs/Release). | ||
|
|
||
| ## What's NOT Changing | ||
|
|
||
| - **Long-Term Support duration** remains similar (29 months). | ||
| - **Migration windows preserved**. Overlap between LTS versions remains. | ||
| - **Quality standards unchanged**. Same testing, same CITGM, same security process. | ||
| - **Predictable schedule**. April releases, October LTS promotion. | ||
| - **V8 adoption cycle**. Node.js latest releases will still include a version of | ||
| V8 that's at most about 6 months old. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Timeline | ||
|
|
||
|  | ||
UlisesGascon marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
|
||
| ### Node.js 26 Schedule (existing model) | ||
|
|
||
| | Milestone | Date | | ||
| | ----------- | ------------ | | ||
| | 26.0.0 | April 2026 | | ||
| | Enters LTS | October 2026 | | ||
| | Maintenance | October 2027 | | ||
| | End of Life | April 2029 | | ||
|
|
||
| Node.js 26 follows the existing schedule. This is the last release line under the current model. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Node.js 27 Schedule (new model) | ||
|
|
||
| | Milestone | Date | | ||
| | ------------ | ------------ | | ||
| | Alpha begins | October 2026 | | ||
| | 27.0.0 | April 2027 | | ||
| | Enters LTS | October 2027 | | ||
| | End of Life | March 2030 | | ||
|
|
||
| Node.js 27 is the first release line under the new schedule. | ||
|
|
||
| ### The Next 10 Years | ||
|
|
||
| | Version | Alpha | Current | LTS | End of Life | | ||
| | ------- | -------- | -------- | -------- | ----------- | | ||
| | 27.x | Oct 2026 | Apr 2027 | Oct 2027 | Mar 2030 | | ||
| | 28.x | Oct 2027 | Apr 2028 | Oct 2028 | Mar 2031 | | ||
| | 29.x | Oct 2028 | Apr 2029 | Oct 2029 | Mar 2032 | | ||
| | 30.x | Oct 2029 | Apr 2030 | Oct 2030 | Mar 2033 | | ||
| | 31.x | Oct 2030 | Apr 2031 | Oct 2031 | Mar 2034 | | ||
| | 32.x | Oct 2031 | Apr 2032 | Oct 2032 | Mar 2035 | | ||
| | 33.x | Oct 2032 | Apr 2033 | Oct 2033 | Mar 2036 | | ||
| | 34.x | Oct 2033 | Apr 2034 | Oct 2034 | Mar 2037 | | ||
| | 35.x | Oct 2034 | Apr 2035 | Oct 2035 | Mar 2038 | | ||
| | 36.x | Oct 2035 | Apr 2036 | Oct 2036 | Mar 2039 | | ||
|
|
||
| This schedule is not final and may be amended. Refer to the | ||
| [`schedule.json`](https://github.com/nodejs/Release/blob/HEAD/schedule.json) for an up-to-date | ||
| record of the support claims from the project. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Thank You | ||
|
|
||
| This change is the result of discussions across GitHub issues, Release Working Group meetings, and | ||
| [the Collaboration Summit Chesapeake 2025](https://youtu.be/ppi87YjU9x0?si=NFF5WKIGDJE_U-_V&t=6524). | ||
| We will continue discussing this topic at the upcoming Collaboration Summit in London. | ||
| We thank everyone who contributed feedback. | ||
|
|
||
| For questions or comments, see [nodejs/Release#1113](https://github.com/nodejs/Release/issues/1113). | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is just a placeholder, no idea when makes sense to publish it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's align it with Kylie and Robin. We should create an official tweet using Node.js account along with it.