On Tue, 2022-08-02 at 10:08 +0200, Alexander Kanavin wrote:

I tend to agree that warnings popping out of nowhere when the stable
branch is close to (or beyond) EOL is 'too late' - if you got yourself
into that situation, you're likely to have a broader maintainability
problem.

However, I do not agree with the "how can we justify doing nothing at
all" rhetoric I see from people here: I do want to raise awareness of
the lifecycles, and as early as possible for anyone using the project.
So if you say 'this is not going to work', please try to be
constructive and offer alternatives.

Keep in mind that the LTS are still comparatively new in the timescales
people work within and that we have changed and defined a new policy
comparatively recently. A large portion of this is a social issue as
Philip mentioned and people do pick up and learn that over time. This
isn't the only aspect of the project people need to learn.

I'm not convinced we have to "solve" this problem with technical means.
We do have information out there explaining things and that information
is improving over time (e.g. the EOL notices on the older release
manuals) which was surprisingly difficult and only done embarrassingly
recently. We are also trying our best to have good new features which
offer people a reason to upgrade. This isn't doing nothing.

Cheers,

Richard