Personally I would like to see a 3.x release become LTR as soon as possible. 3.0 should be skipped because despite it's incredibly high stability there could potentially still be problems. So the next in line is 3.2.
I think having 2.18.x and 3.2.x available in parallel for an extended period is a good thing. The 3.x transition will take some time. So let's give a nice and long enough grace period to end users and orgs but with a clear deadline for 2.18 so we are not stuck in the 2 release series forever. Matthias On 02/22/2017 03:57 PM, Borys Jurgiel wrote: > It's an option, too. The question is which one is supposed to be more mature, > stable and polished: 3.2.5 or 3.4.0. Anyway, in both cases the lifetime of > 2.18 LTR seems to be clear now. > > Dnia środa, 22 lutego 2017 15:22:11 DelazJ pisze: >> Hi, >> >> I think there usually (ok! it happens only once) is an overlap between two >> LT releases: 2.8 was maintained few months after 2.14 (I think it was >> stopped when 2.16 was released) - >> http://qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/development/roadmap.html >> So following that logic, 3.2 would be released in january and replace 2.18 >> in june as LTR (with the release of 3.4) >> >> Harrissou > > _______________________________________________ > Qgis-developer mailing list > Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > _______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer