I think that we should consider making the last release from a series an LTS release and patch that one for a decided period (ex 12 months) This way a downstream project that uses an older release can always use the latest release that is API compatible without the need to patch the project.
If you need help with the patches and release I offer to help //Alin On Fri, 18 Sep 2020, 16:06 Gregory Nutt, <spudan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 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? > >
