On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 11:01:47AM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: > On 10/20/2016 10:43 AM, Paolo Cavallini wrote: > > Il 20/10/2016 09:56, Neumann, Andreas ha scritto: > >> I'd also like to revisit the discussion about ending 2.x with an LT > >> version. > >> > >> It just seems illogical to me, to not end 2.x with an LT version. It is > >> kind of a waste of resources if we continue to backport stuff to 2.14 > >> only and loose out on the many useful new features that were introduced > >> in 2.16 and 2.18. Think about all the nice things, like multi-attribute > >> search, multi-attribute editing, forms/widget improvements, and many > >> more - that won't reach the masses, because they are not in an LT > >> release for at least another year! > >> > >> Let's be more flexible and allow ourself to break the strict rule that > >> an LT version can only appear once a year, every third release. Rules > >> are here to break where useful/necessary. > > > > It makes sense to me - let's see, if 2.18 will be a good, stable version > > we can promote it to LTR. > > Or make 2.20 the last LTR.
+1 Also considering the willingness to inject more features into "2.18" (which should be freezed by now). A 2.20 would also respect the normal cycle, right ? --strk; _______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
