[arch-general] Why no option to stay with clamav 103 since as a LTS release it will be supported longer then 104?

[David C. Rankin]

All,

  Just curious why Arch doesn't also provide the option to track clamav_LTS
which will stay with 103 and will be supported much longer than 104?

  I know, I know, Arch matches upstream, but when upstream provides both
current and LTS, wouldn't it make sense to also package and provide LTS like
with the kernel? (the packaging would be trivial and the same between the
current and LTS aside from the source package for all purposes)

  Just a thought as there is real advantage to being able to track the clamav
LTS release here, without hacking pacman.conf. There are few packages that
actually provide a LTS branch so it wouldn't open the flood gates to a bevy of
new packages.

-- 
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.