[Qgis-psc] Discussing LTR Update frequency

[Andreas Neumann]

Right,

If we treat the new LTR release like a "regular" release in the 
beginning, with monthly updates, my concerns are void. Also, if we can 
release extra versions in case of a severe issues, like Nyall suggested.

Thanks,

Andreas

On 2021-11-20 21:14, Denis Rouzaud wrote:

> Isn't there a misunderstanding when the release actually becomes LTR?
> 
> I would have thought that there is 1 release per month for the first 3 
> months, and then, when it turns LTR and from this time only every 3 
> months?
> 
> Le sam. 20 nov. 2021 à 09:55, Andreas Neumann <a.neumann at carto.net> a 
> écrit :
> 
>> Dear PSC colleagues and core devs,
>> 
>> We have discussed to reduce the update frequency of the LTR release at 
>> the last meeting. I think everybody sort of agreed to reduce the nr of 
>> releases in the light of starting manual testing prior to release.
>> 
>> Marco announced that on a mail to the QGIS users mailing list: 
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-user/2021-November/050232.html
>> 
>> BUT: i don't remember that we came to a final decision/conclusion on 
>> how often to really release. I have doubts that the fixed quarterly 
>> releases are a good idea, because of the following:
>> 
>> - in the first few months of the lifetime of an LTR there are 
>> typically way more issues discovered than later. I think that the 
>> beginning of an LTR we need a denser release schedule than just 
>> quarterly
>> 
>> - we have a quarantine rule that backports that go into the regular 
>> release can only go into the LTR release after one month of quarantine 
>> in the regular release. This can further delay important backports in 
>> the light of only releasing LTR updates quarterly.
>> 
>> I would like to discuss whether we could have some schedule that 
>> starts a bit denser at the beginning and then thins out later in the 
>> lifetime of an LTR.
>> 
>> E.g. something like:
>> 
>> LTR-Release:and releases 1, 2, 4,6,9,12 months after the release.
>> 
>> I know this is a bit more complicated to handle, but I believe it 
>> ŵould be more useful for the users.
>> 
>> What do you think?
>> 
>> Andreas _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-psc mailing list
>> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20211121/9761d5f6/attachment-0001.html>