I completely understand that it takes work to patch and regression test
previous releases, but I just want to understand our policy and threshold
for what gets backported.
There should be an established policy. I agree on that.
In the old BDFL model, I only updated releases via patches and only for
about two weeks after the release. The only purpose being to assure
that the release was a valid stable snapshot of the development. After
that, well then the release just has bugs.
From Brennan's response, it seems like we are limited in the same way,
not by policy but by process.
But perhaps we should consider an LTS release? Perhaps the last in
series of releases with the same major revision number should be an LTS
release?
