fix(release): fix issues with maintenance and active lts

[avivkeller]

There are many times where we reference the 'LTS' status in an attempt to get an Long-Term Support version. However, the 'LTS' status actually refers to the Active Long-Term Support version.

This PR makes the Maintenance vs Active LTS labels more distinct (as to not cause confusion), and replaces instances of checking 'LTS' with isLts.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Updated (UTC)
nodejs-org	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	Jul 14, 2025 9:48pm

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

This PR refines how Long-Term Support (LTS) statuses are labeled and consumed throughout the site, introducing distinct “Active LTS” and “Maintenance LTS” labels and migrating from status string checks to an isLts flag.

• Expanded the set of release statuses to include separate active and maintenance LTS labels
• Updated the release status generator and type definitions to emit and handle the new labels
• Refactored UI components and data routes to use isLts and display the updated labels

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 10 out of 10 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
apps/site/util/download/constants.json	Added “Active LTS” and “Maintenance LTS” to the supported release list
apps/site/types/releases.ts	Replaced 'LTS'/'Maintenance' with 'Active LTS'/'Maintenance LTS'
apps/site/next-data/generators/releaseData.mjs	Updated status returns in getNodeReleaseStatus and isLts mapping
apps/site/app/[locale]/next-data/api-data/route.ts	Switched from .status === 'LTS' to .isLts when selecting version
apps/site/components/Downloads/Release/VersionDropdown.tsx	Generalized LTS detection to endsWith('LTS') for dropdown labels

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (1)

apps/site/components/Downloads/Release/VersionDropdown.tsx:15

• [nitpick] Collapsing both 'Active LTS' and 'Maintenance LTS' into a generic '(LTS)' suffix loses the distinction between the two. Consider branching so that active releases display (Active LTS) and maintenance releases (Maintenance LTS).

  if (status.endsWith('LTS')) {

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 50.00000% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 73.08%. Comparing base (b035290) to head (8f3d21c).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
apps/site/next-data/generators/releaseData.mjs	33.33%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #7979      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   73.10%   73.08%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files          95       95              
  Lines        8355     8355              
  Branches      219      219              
==========================================
- Hits         6108     6106       -2     
- Misses       2246     2248       +2     
  Partials        1        1              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[bmuenzenmeyer]

@avivkeller I assume your closures of #7966 and #7965 allude to this? i didnt see code or a PR attached to them?

[avivkeller]

No, I closed them since I felt they were resolved in #7962, which both changed the colors (#7965), and the names (#7966)

[ovflowd]

No, I closed them since I felt they were resolved in #7962, which both changed the colors (#7965), and the names (#7966)

I don't think they were fully resolved. @bmuenzenmeyer was also questioning the LTS schedule generation itself to get updated and other things... But not sure if they are related.

[avivkeller]

@bmuenzenmeyer was also questioning the LTS schedule generation itself to get updated and other things

I think those concerns are in nodejs/Release#1111?

[avivkeller]

We can also re-open the previous issue if I made the wrong call.

[bmuenzenmeyer]

oh, apologies, i wasnt aware that that PR handled my issues (as they were opened while reviewing it

[ovflowd]

We can also re-open the previous issue if I made the wrong call.

All fine, I noticed those are not totally related, I think this PR is good and appreciate your contribution here ✨

[ovflowd]

SGTM. I hope this PR covers all paths and doesn't accidentally break something haha (I bet TS covers that, but who knows)