On 5/18/2018 4:27 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> Stefan Sperling wrote on 2018-05-18:
>> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 02:54:03PM +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
>>> LTS release:
>>> * full backports for at least 2 years, and at least until the next LTS release
>>> * security/corruption fixes for at least 4 years, and at least until the next-but-one LTS release
>> What do you mean exactly with next-but-one LTS release?
> I meant:
> * full backports for the greater of (until the (N+1)th LTS release) and (2 years)
> * security/corruption fixes for the greater of (until the (N+2)th LTS release) and (4 years)
>
> So if someone ignores all the non-LTS releases from now on, the promises they get for LTS releases would correspond pretty much exactly to how we have been managing all of our release up to and including 1.10.
>
> BTW, as well as designating 1.10 as LTS, we would also designate 1.9 as an LTS release (which is now in its "security/corruption fixes only" support phase). And the way we are treating 1.8 (which recently reached the end of its security/corruption fixes support period) would be exactly the same as if we had designated 1.8 as an LTS release.
>
> - Julian
>
FWIW: Sounds all fine and in line with what was discussed/agreed upon
already. Personally I still have the feeling that moving on to the 6
month release cycle might turn out to be quite a release burdon/overhead
but that already was said that we eventually might have to adjust the
release procedure a bit and improve the automation (which already
improved for the 1.10 release).
--
Regards,
Stefan Hett
Received on 2018-05-18 17:41:11 CEST