Julian Foad wrote on Fri, 16 Aug 2019 09:47 +00:00: > Stefan Sperling wrote: > > [...] > But the amount of work involved in everyone else running tests and > signing > > releases must also be considered. We barely made the required signature > > count > > for our last 3 releases. Focussing our volunteer resources on releases that > > are actually used by Debian and Red Hat (as reference platforms that usually > > ship our "oldest" releases) seems fair. > > > >> So I vote for softly reducing the support effort while leaving it > >> documented > >> as "supported". > > > > That's fine with me. It would more or less amount to the same thing :) > > We have had "security and data corruption fixes only" backport guidelines > > in the past. I'd suggest we could apply this to 1.9. > > Sounds good to me.
What's 1.9's new end-of-life date, then? Until what (past or future) date do we _commit_ to backporting critical fixes?
