<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">See also <a href="https://blog.qgis.org/2025/10/07/update-on-qgis-4-0-release-schedule-and-ltr-plans/">https://blog.qgis.org/2025/10/07/update-on-qgis-4-0-release-schedule-and-ltr-plans/</a></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">where this was communicated.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Andreas</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, 2 Nov 2025 at 16:44, Greg Troxel via QGIS-Developer <<a href="mailto:qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org">qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">I saw 3.40.12 and updated pkgsrc, and the .12 being pretty high made me<br>
guess that there was a new LTR and I should look at it. I went to read<br>
<br>
<a href="https://qgis.org/resources/roadmap/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://qgis.org/resources/roadmap/</a><br>
<br>
and after staring at it for a long time, my take is:<br>
<br>
- 3.44 is *going to be* LTR, but will not be blessed as such until<br>
3.44.8 in February<br>
<br>
- What is unusual is that LTR will be 3.44.8, not 3.46.4, because<br>
there was no 3.46 in 2025-10, but we're still holding off until<br>
February, because some blend of<br>
+ LTR promotion is always February<br>
+ LTR promotion of a future-LTR happens only when the next branch<br>
.0 comes out.<br>
<br>
- 4.2 will become LTR in 2026-10, which is out of cycle, and probably<br>
we'll then see 4.8 in 2027-10 with LTRs happening on October<br>
instead of February. (That's an observation not a complaint.)<br>
<br>
If I'm confused a clue would be appreciated, and if 99.9% of the list<br>
was already super clear sorry for the noise.<br>
<br>
Separately, given that pkgsrc is on the fence between "latest release is<br>
fine" and "LTR is more stable and better", I should be planning to<br>
switch from 3.40.x to 3.44.x, and any time between now and just after<br>
the LTR-blessing of 3.44 on 2026-02-20 is a reasonable time to do that.<br>
(I am building 3.44.4 from source and it's halfway through.)<br>
<br>
My impression is that 3.44 is entirely stable and that for normal users<br>
(not trying to coordinate with other packaging systems in big<br>
organizations, and not having the LTS "running old code on purpose is<br>
good" outlook), there is no real reason to stay on 3.40.<br>
<br>
It is clear that I should try to package 4.0, or even 3.99, but as a<br>
separate/experimental package, to surface and resolve qt6 issues.<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
QGIS-Developer mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
List info: <a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a><br>
Unsubscribe: <a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a><br>
</blockquote></div><div><br clear="all"></div><br><span class="gmail_signature_prefix">-- </span><br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><br>--<br>Andreas Neumann<br></div><a href="http://QGIS.ORG" target="_blank">QGIS.ORG</a> board member (treasurer)<br></div></div>