On 2021-11-05 17:47:13 +0000 (+0000), Sean Mooney wrote: [...]
if we were to intoduce LTS release we would have to agree on what they were as a compunity and we would need to support roling upgrade between LTS versions [...]
Yes, but what about upgrades between LTS and non-LTS versions (from or to)? Do we test all those as well? And if we don't, are users likely to want to use the non-LTS versions at all knowing they might be unable to cleanly update from them to an LTS version later on?
so something like 1 lts release a year maintained for 2 years with normal release every 6 months that are only maintianed for 6 months [...]
To restate what I said in my other reply, this assumes a future where skip-level upgrades are possible. Otherwise what happens with a series of releases like A,b,C,d,E where A/C/E are the LTS releases and b/d are the non-LTS releases and someone who's using A wants to upgrade to C but we've already stopped maintaining b and can't guarantee it's even installable any longer? If the LTS idea is interesting to people, then we should take a step back and work on switching from FFU to SLU first. If we can't solve that, then there's no point to having non-LTS releases. -- Jeremy Stanley