No subject

minor-upgrade causes some (small to big) issues. Be it because of the
core or (more often) because of extensions.

And based on that experience, we've started to treat each upgrade (as in
all version-upgrades of the core, except the path-level-updates within
the same branch) the same way: We do it, but in one step, without
something like a pre-update.

In addition, we're not talking about few but big installations, rather
than many many (200+) installations (small, medium and few big ones)
that are maintained - we just couldn't handle doing multi-step upgrades
(limited human power). But also our customers are happier with each
avoided upgrade (which usually causes work both on agency and customer
side for discussion, testing, ...).

> Why? Well, because
> you know that the most critical things won't change until then in any
> significant way, due to our deprecation cycle. And due to the fact that
> 6.2 would then be an LTS, we'd rather avoid to drop features even if
> they're deprecated (as we did in 4.5). So from my perspective 6 month
> overlap would be fine, if we really agree to have an LTS.

Well, you as a core-dev knows those internal things. An agency which has
core-devs in their team probably knows that stuff. But there are many
many one-man-shows, small companies and "notable" agencies with 10+
employees building websites with TYPO3 that don't have a core-dev at
hand and so do rely on the official releases.

> But having an LTS (as stated in other posts) is really just a marketing
> issue from my point of view and that should/could be resolved in
> other/better ways.

Of course it's also marketing. But I see some aspects (even
feedback/questions from our customers) that speak clearly for having LTS
versions and having LTS-versions that overlap.

I'm open for discussion!

Cheers,
Mario