> Perhaps companies like Atlassian that rely on the stability of the > open source Git can spare some resources and join forces with like > minded folks on LTS of older maintenance tracks, if they are truly > interested in. We certainly can and would like to. I'm not entirely sure what that would entail though? >From reading through $gmane/264365 I've identified the following responsibilities/opportunities to help: > - Monitor "git log --first-parent maint-lts..master" and find > the tip of topic branches that need to be down-merged; > > - Down-merge such topics to maint-lts; this might involve > cherry-picking instead of merge, as the bugfix topics may > originally be done on the codebase newer than maint-lts; and more importantly testing the maint-lts version to ensure backported changes don't introduce regressions and the maint-lts branch is stable. This suggests specific, spaced LTS versions but in the same thread you mention maint-2.1or maint-2.2. So a different model could be maintaining old versions in a sliding window fashion (e.g. critical issues would be backported to the last 6 months worth of git releases). Maybe I'm getting ahead of myself here :) Anyway, long story short. We're interested to help but I'm not entirely sure what that would look like at the moment. Are there formed ideas floating around or would you be looking for some form of proposal instead? Cheers, Stefan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html