Bug fixing in older releases is actually a lot of work. For security related issues we could maybe do it.
Personally, I prefer to have a fast release cycle and smooth (tested) upgrade paths over 2-year LTS release cycle. It's more agile. As a bonus, people get the new features. The more people do upgrades that work (tm) the more confident they are. I'd really want to show that upgrades work so well that we need no LTS. But there might be other reasons people have where LTS would help. Please share! Regards, Remi > On 02 Jul 2015, at 16:25, Rene Moser <m...@renemoser.net> wrote: > > Maybe a little bit off topic to the new release process, therefor a new > thread... > > speaking about releases. I just thought about supporting LTS releases. > > This would mean "someone" or "we" make a commitment to add bug fixes > (only) for a specified time. e.g. 2 years for a release or until the > next LTS release? > > Would this something anyone would be interested in? > > Yours > René
