[arch-general] Does LTS package really not fit to Rolling Release model and Arch Philosophy?

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 02:34:08 +0900, Ken OKABE via arch-general wrote:
>What kind of scenario in the real world to be problematic to maintain
>KDE Plasma LTS line as separated packages from non-LTS?

Apart from the policy, the problem are maintainers willing it to do and
to provide it by a third party repository. It's not that much work
to provide it and all dependencies as separated packages, as long as
you don't want e.g. security patches. IOW if you expect some quality,
it's not just installing everything to /opt or providing it by
something like snaps, you also need to maintain it, e.g. if there
should be known vulnerabilities.

What's completely missing by the kernel related explanation is, that
upstrem provides, IOW maintains longterm linux,
https://www.kernel.org/ . Does KDE upstream maintain KDE Plasma LTS?

Regards,
Ralf