On 10/20/2016 11:12 AM, Matthias Kuhn wrote: > On 10/20/2016 11:04 AM, Sandro Santilli wrote: >> 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
Sorry, my bad. Realized that 2.20 would be in line. But that would mean a triple branch strategy for another 4 months, putting more load on devs. Especially when it's about releasing 3.2 and 2.20 as LTR at the same time. I can't actually imagine we've got enough manpower to do both jobs well at the same time. I think LTR clients just have to realize that it's fewer features they trade fewer features for stability. Matthias _______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
