There is always going to be a tension between having the latest greatest and having stability for a period of time.
I do find the Sonar support model somewhat agressive - it is “all or nothing” - basically you stick to the LTS version and miss out on bug fixes/new features you need or you upgrade to a version that includes them and you are now on the cycle where every new release immediately means the previous version is technically no longer supported - so you theoretically have to keep upgrading in order to be supported.
Even sticking with the LTS version, as soon as the new one comes out, you techincally don’t support the old one anymore so LTS users have a potentially bigger hurdle to do an “immediate” upgrade than those who have been updating every two months…
It is not always possible (or desirable) in an organisation, even a small-ish one to immediately jump to the just release version of something. Other work priorities, or simply a desire to wait a few days/weeks to see if any major bugs pop up can mean that you can’t “immediately” upgrade to the newest version.
If you look at the Microsoft support model for .NET, they have a release every year - “odd” versions are supported for about 6 months after the next “even” LTS release, and LTS releases themselves are supported for I believe 3 years - in both cases you have a fairly significant overlap of official support in order to be able to plan your upgrades, test them, execute on same.
I’m not suggesting that Sonar continue support for these sorts of extended timeframes but it would not seem unreasonable for example to have an LTS release every year that is supported for say 6 months after the next LTS release and non-LTS releases every 2 months which are supported for 3 months after the next release (LTS or otherwise)
As others have wondered in this thread, if bugfixes are not back-ported to the “LTS” version then what actual purpose does an LTS version serve, other than to be a line in the sand? Particularly when a new release requires an immediate upgrade in order for support to continue.
I accept that you may continue “unofficially” to support older versions but it doesn’t seem particularly satisfactory to be in that position.
At the other end of the scale of trying to keep up with the latest greatest in general, I know some vendors who release new versions of their apps/packages every other day it seems, so keeping up with latest of even one of them would essentially be a full time job - in such cases, we have to take a view on upgrading at some regular cadence to keep “reasonably” up to date.