[quote="dirk-thomas, post:4, topic:2744"]
There are also other options to consider. Between LTS releases every two years we could follow a rolling release (which at the end of the two years becomes the next LTS). That way we can track newer Linux distributions when they come out.
[/quote]
I'm liking that idea, as it would perhaps give each upcoming LTS more time to mature and receive develoment as well as feedback from end users while at the same time making sure migration efforts are directly invested into the porting and distro adoption of the greater ROS package ecosystem.
Are there any commentaries or studies you'd suggest on how well it works in practice, say from the Debian maintainers? Or archived mailing list discussion/debates on why canonical choose follow this release strategy? Maintaining a incremental release system on moving target in active development seems like quite a bit to juggle though.
---
[Visit Topic](
https://discourse.ros.org/t/time-for-reviewing-ros-distro-release-cycle/2744/7) or reply to this email to respond.
If you do not want to receive messages from ros-users please use the unsubscribe link below. If you use the one above, you will stop all of ros-users from receiving updates.
______________________________________________________________________________
ros-users mailing list
ros-users@lists.ros.org
http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
Unsubscribe: <
http://lists.ros.org/mailman//options/ros-users>
(text/plain)