On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 07:54:24AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > 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. > That's basically the Ubuntu model. They do 9 months for regular > releases, and 5 years (originally 3 years) for LTS releases. > > However, what could also work would be something along the lines of > openSUSE Evergreen[1] model (prior to the shift to openSUSE Leap + > Tumbleweed), where the community decides on a version to stabilize and > maintain for bugfixes for an extended period of time. If we wanted to > talk about having extended lifecycles, I think this would be a > workable model. This would be similar to the original Fedora Legacy > project (if anyone remembers that!). > > [1]: https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Evergreen Yeah I came into Fedora through the Legacy project. :) There are also ideas from Tom Callaway's proposal from FUDCon Lawrence: a major release every two years, followed by point updates. Kind of like RHL back in the day. -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ 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
