I would like to start a discussion on 2.5.0 and give some insights on my thoughts related to it.
First and foremost: there is cool stuff in 2.5.0 that I really, REALLY wish were in a releasable, usable artifact. Up to now, we've been doing these as backports to the 2.4.x tree with, imo at least, good success. So I think the main questions regarding 2.5.0 is a list of items/issues that simply *cannot* be backported, due to API/ABI concerns. And then gauge the "value" of the items on that list. Another would be to look at some of the items currently "on hold" for backporting, due to outstanding questions, tech issues, more needed work/QA, etc... IMO, if these backports lack "support" for 2.4.x, then I wonder how "reliable" they are (or how tested they are) in the 2.5.o tree. And if the answer is "we pull them out of 2.5.0" then the question after that is what really *are* the diffs between 2.5.0 and 2.4.x... If, however, the answer is "tagging 2.5.0 will encourage us to address those issues" then my question is "Why aren't we doing that now... for 2.4.x". And finally: 2.4.x is now, finally, being the default version in distros, being the go-to version that people are using, etc... I would like us to encourage that momentum.