On 11/14/2018 11:35 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
If Fedora had longer life cycles, and more streams maintained in parallel, then I think the result would be that I end up doing rebases for everything I maintain rather than trying to backport anything. Admittedly this would somewhat negate the supposed benefit of having stable long life releases, but its either that or the releases bitrot accumulating more & more bugs & security flaws.
I agree, this would lead to too much workload on the maintainers if we just add a new long-lived branch. There's already rawhide, F29, F28, F27 which is already quite a lot of branches to maintain. However, I think this could work if we change how long we maintain the non-LTS branches. If we reduce the non-LTS supported time from 13 months to, let's say, 7 months (2 months overlap to allow for time to upgrade) then perhaps it could work? And then add a LTS branch that's supported for 3 years? We'd have the same number of branches as now, just that one is LTS. -- Kalev _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
