What about monthly or quarterly release strategy for minor versions?

[actionless]

the time shows that the current approach to release it as soon as it's good enough - is not working really well, as some of small release-blockers are not getting fixed for a pretty long time, and at the same time even after the past releases we were still receiving bug reports - so the code is never good enough.

it's not personally affects me in any way as an arch's AUR user, as I'm always on latest-ish git version, but it should make situation better for an average ubuntu/fedora user who are still reporting bugs for 4.3 which is several years old

i think ground work which ELV done on improving API backward-compatibility strategies and defining API levels interface - should make it quite painless to have that semi-rolling release (as far as i could judge from the fully-rolling release i use)

[Elv13]

As long as there's regressions, doing a release would break users computers. We did that in the past and it caused more harm than anything else.

[actionless]

yup, that's a problem, but how longer release period is helping to avoid that?

also that works in both directions - for bugs/regressions found in the release users wouldn't get fixes for several years

[Elv13]

I don't have enough bandwidth to fix all the bugs marked for 4.4. Someone needs to byte the bullet and submit patches

[actionless]

even if someone would - fixing and getting them all merged might take 0.5 year or more (https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/issues?page=1&q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+milestone%3Av4.4)