[Development] Qt 5.6 LTS - who defines criteria what gets "bug fixed"

[Michael Möllney]

Now (finally) Qt 5.6.0 LTS knocks at the door (RC published today)

I appreciate the decisions to support this 5.6.x release for at least 3 
years, plus possible time extension.

Looking for a definition what this actually means, I could find in
Planet Qt http://blog.qt.io/blog/2016/02/22/qt-roadmap-for-2016/ :

[quote]
Long-Term Support

Qt 5.6 is the first Long-Term Supported (LTS) version of Qt since Qt 
4.8. As part of our LTS promise,
we guarantee that Qt 5.6 will be supported for three years via standard 
support, after which additional
extended support can be purchased. During this time period, even though 
following
Qt releases (Qt 5.7, Qt 5.8 and so on) are available, Qt 5.6 will 
receive patch releases providing
bug fixes and security updates throughout the three-year period after 
the release.
[quote]

This sounds good: support, bug fixes and security updates! Yeah!
In other mailing list threads 
(http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2016-February/024943.html)
there is even discussion if platforms that might establish in these 3 
years should get support... wow!

But who decides or gives guidance to the developers, if a bug found in 
5.6.x should be fixed in this LTS.

E.g. have a look at a patch history in 
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/109157/
That patch evolved through 5.4, 5.5, 5.6 and now is moved to 5.7 with 
advice to use C++11 features.
The comments finally focused in a discussion on what branch/release to 
put that particular bug fix / behavior change.
There is some arguing that this patch is a "behavior change", but which 
fix is not a behavior change.
Sometimes bugs do not crash they "just" do not what the documentation 
says: It's not always easy to tell.

So my question or suggestion to reduced bug fixing time is:

- Is there or should there be an authority/committee that decides early, 
if a bug is worth to be fixed for 5.6 LTS?
   Maybe in bugreports.qt.io: if the "Affects Version/s" contains 
"5.6.x" the authority
   could "Label" it 5.6-LTS to hint the fixing branch?
- Is there or should there be a Wiki-Page giving rules of thump, what 
inconsistent between API docs and actual behavior
   is a bug that should be fixed in 5.6 LTS?

I think this could help developers to decide early, if the patch should 
evolve with old compiler compatibility and
becomes a fix in 5.6.x, or if the developer should jump directly to the 
5.7 branch and make use of nice C++11 features.

Cheers,
Michael