Applications 17.12 as LTS release?

Martin Flöser mgraesslin at
Mon Jul 31 15:06:06 UTC 2017

Am 2017-07-31 16:19, schrieb David Faure:
> On lundi 31 juillet 2017 14:42:34 CEST Luca Beltrame wrote:
>> Il giorno Mon, 31 Jul 2017 12:19:48 +0200
>> Elvis Angelaccio <elvis.angelaccio at> ha scritto:
>> > an LTS release. What would be needed from a practical point of view?
>> > (changes to release/i18n scripts, etc.?)
>> One potential "problematic" point I can see is having to deal with 3
>> branches (master, latest, LTS).
>> > * New openSUSE and Ubuntu LTS releases due next year.
>> With my distro hat on, it would be a *huge* +1. It would make matters 
>> a
>> lot better for the next openSUSE release.
> I don't think LTS releases are always good for distros.
> For instance, I just installed OpenSuSE Leap 42.3, and the very bad 
> surprise
> is the state of printing in KMail (which opens a webbrowser for 
> printing, with
> inconvenience and bugs on top). Why? Because while KMail is recent 
> (17.04.2),
> the Qt version in that release is Qt 5.6.2. For no good reason IMHO, 
> just
> because it was stamped LTS.
> Before we had LTS Qt releases, this distro (who *just* came out!) would 
> for
> sure have been using Qt 5.8 instead, leading to a much better user 
> experience
> with KMail (who didn't just need bugfixes, but also new API to be able 
> to fix
> printing and focus stealing and many other issues in WebEngine).

That depends on who you ask. If you ask the Plasma team (especially 
those involved with Wayland) they consider 5.8 a broken release without 
any chance of fixing as Qt doesn't do bug fix releases for it.

IMHO any distro shipping 5.8 acts irresponsible.

And this is a good reason for using LTS as distros: it gives at least 
some time frame where both application developers and distributors can 
build on a common ground to test against.


More information about the release-team mailing list