[Qgis-developer] Plans after friday's release?

[G. Allegri]

I also agree that having 2.18 as LTR would be advisable.
The switch to 3.x will be very delicate for many organizations, therefore
lot of people will stitch to 2.x LTR before doing the big jump. That will
mean that 2.14 will be mantained for a very long time if we won't have a
new LTR...

m2c,
giovanni


2016-10-20 10:47 GMT+02:00 Régis Haubourg <regis.haubourg at gmail.com>:

>
>> >
>> > 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.
>>
>> All the best, and thanks.
>>
>> --
>> Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
>> QGIS & PostGIS courses: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
>> https://www.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=IT&q=qgis,arcgis
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-developer mailing list
>> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>> Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
>
> Hi all,
> same here, users would not understand not having 2.18 as LTR.
> Régis
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
> List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20161020/e18570a7/attachment.html>