LTR Versions should be supported for 2 years
Tim Sutton
Public
Seen by 275
The introduction of LTR releases has provided a nice 'known good' platform for enterprise users. However it is my feeling (and anecdotally the impression of others I talk to) that 1 year is too short to be considered 'long term'. If you build a work flow or a plugin based on the LTR, having to update it on a yearly basis is inconvenient. As such I would like to propose that we (starting from 2.14) extend the LTR period to 2 years. LTR releases would be non-concurrent so that there is only ever one QGIS 'Official' LTR being supported at one time.
Poll Created Thu 28 Jan 2016 1:26PM
I agree that QGIS LTR releases should receive 2 years support starting from 2.14 Closed Thu 4 Feb 2016 1:07PM
Results
| Results | Option | % of points | Voters | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Agree | 100.0% | 3 |
|
| Abstain | 0.0% | 0 | ||
| Disagree | 0.0% | 0 | ||
| Block | 0.0% | 0 | ||
| Undecided | 0% | 7 |
|
3 of 10 people have participated (30%)
Paolo Cavallini
Fri 29 Jan 2016 10:29AM
Sounds reasonable, especially since we expect some turbolence over extended periods in the migration to 3.0
Richard Duivenvoorde Thu 28 Jan 2016 3:48PM
IF it is clear to those people that they will only have one LTR per two years then, and NOT every year an LTR which is supported for 2 years?
Or do we get the same 'problems' as before: after 14 months the same users are starting to complain that they want those nice new features.....
I think one year is a good compromise. Users are free to use the before-last LTR for another year if they want. And IF there is truly a problem with the 'old LTR' they can bump there installations to our last (and updated) release.
Jürgen E. Fischer Mon 1 Feb 2016 1:11PM
Well, the move to 3.0 is mostly motivated by the degrading support for the dependencies we need for 2.x - and now we're trying to maintain 2.x even longer?
Paolo Cavallini Mon 1 Feb 2016 4:50PM
Quite reasonable, Juergen. This is especially bad for our .deb users.
Tim Sutton Mon 1 Feb 2016 6:37PM
@jef OK what about we have a timeline like:
Feb 2016 - Release 2.14 LTR
June 2016 - Release 2.16 / 3.0 beta1 / whatever we decide
Oct 2016 - Release 3.0
Feb 2017 - Release 3.2 LTR
And then support for 3.2 is 2 years (and so on for future LTR releases)?
Andreas Neumann Wed 3 Feb 2016 4:49PM
I will wait with my vote on this, until we have made a decision around QGIS 3.0 - because I think the exact timing of LTRs is somehow connected with 3.0
Andreas Neumann · Thu 28 Jan 2016 3:15PM
We had a meeting of the Swiss QGIS user groups - the larger QGIS users (e.g. provinces) would be very interested in having two years of support for the LT Release. If we have the resources to maintain the LT Release longer I would certainly agree with the proposal to extend the support period to two years.