It's time to formally recognize that the WG activity is off the bottom of the list versus available resources and priorities for the folks who'd brought passion to it the past two years. If there are others who want to engage to drive this discussion area, now's the time to step up. Tuesday Sept. 22's a fine time to discuss.
The primary reason a WG was driving discussions instead of SIG Release was to give focus organizing and pulling in broader stakeholders beyond SIG Release. Choices on release cadence and support lifetime impact all corners of the project. The release cadence was especially contentious with voices proposing opposite (ie: shorter, longer) paths or both at the same time (eg: Tim St. Clair's proposal for very short release cycles with an annual stabilization cycle). So long as "discussing release cadence" is a proactive and broad pull and consensus building effort across the project membership and consumers, it shouldn't matter if it's WG LTS or SIG Release or SIG Architecture or the Prod Readiness subproject or other driving the discussion and SIG Release can operationalize a community decision outcome of that discussion.