On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 05:54:14PM +0100, Julian Foad wrote: > Julian Foad wrote: > > Forget about overlap periods, for a moment. Then there will be usually 3 > > supported lines (after a standard release) and sometimes 2 [...] > > I am wondering if we have been mis-thinking the support plans. Why should we > want to backport feature fixes and improvements for 6 months and then > security fixes for another 6 months in parallel with the next standard > release? Surely the idea is that the standard releases themselves are the > opportunity for feature upgrade, and in exchange for being quick on features > the down side is a short support life. > > A lighter proposal (still ignoring overlap periods, for the moment): > > LTS: a release every 2 years, with 4 years support (security/corruption > fixes, and possibly some other improvements at our discretion); > > standard: a release every 6 months (between LTS releases), with 6 months > support (security/corruption fixes only) > > WDYT? > > - Julian
We have already applied securify patches across 3 releases in some situations, if I recall correctly. And we did this even though the 3rd of those was already officially at end of life. I would prefer having just the minimum requirements we are going to fullfill written down. What you wrote above makes sense to me. I don't see a problem with making decisions to over-deliver on these written promises on a case-by-case basis as we see fit.
