Three Proposals To Consider For Ubuntu Releases

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Three Proposals To Consider For Ubuntu Releases

Rick Spencer of Canonical wrote last week the straw-man proposal to make Ubuntu a rolling release distribution. While there's some concerns over moving to a full rolling release process for non-LTS Ubuntu releases, he is seeking feedback on three possible proposals for handling future Ubuntu Linux releases...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTMyMjI

[Pajn]

If my vote counts it's on "Continue to release interim releases but only support them until
roughly the next interim release 6 months later. "

At least until 14.04. That means release 13.04 (as planned), support it for a minimum of 8 months.
And release 13.10, support it for a minimum of 8 months.

This will ease the burden on Canonical without providing any big drawbacks.
With the current system you would have to update to every interim release anyway (you cant
update from 13.04 to 14.04).

[TemplarGR]

So let me get this straight:

Out of the three proposals, only 2 are creating value for the user, while also reducing the burden on Canonical, and the other (2nd in the list) removes value for the user and only reduces the workload of Canonical.

Knowing Canonical, it is obvious they will pick the second solution. They are not interested in providing something to their users anyway. They never were. All they did is take other people's work and put some themes on it.

That there is someone here with a low post count already in favour of the second solution (which provides no gain to him as a user) fills me with thoughts...

[Sonadow]

That there is someone here with a low post count already in favour of the second solution (which provides no gain to him as a user) fills me with thoughts...

Except that it is similar to how Fedora works: support a release for one new release + 2 months (which gives a total of approximately 6 + 6 + 2 = 14 months).

[TemplarGR]

Except that it is similar to how Fedora works: support a release for one new release + 2 months (which gives a total of approximately 6 + 6 + 2 = 14 months).

Nope, you are obviously wrong:

"- Continue to release interim releases but only support them until
roughly the next interim release 6 months later."

This is ~6 months of support for "interim" releases. Not like Fedora's case at all...

All they want to do, is stop supporting multiple interim releases. Every 6 months they will tell users to upgrade to the next version. That is their view of "rolling release"...

[Pajn]

So let me get this straight:

Out of the three proposals, only 2 are creating value for the user, while also reducing the burden on Canonical, and the other (2nd in the list) removes value for the user and only reduces the workload of Canonical.

Knowing Canonical, it is obvious they will pick the second solution. They are not interested in providing something to their users anyway. They never were. All they did is take other people's work and put some themes on it.

That there is someone here with a low post count already in favour of the second solution (which provides no gain to him as a user) fills me with thoughts...

It's the only proposal that doesn't provide any drawbacks.
The point of ease the burden on Canonical is to make them have more time developing
Unity, Mir, whatever. Which will benefit the users as the software will work better.

What have the post count to do whit anything?

[TemplarGR]

It's the only proposal that doesn't provide any drawbacks.
The point of ease the burden on Canonical is to make them have more time developing
Unity, Mir, whatever. Which will benefit the users as the software will work better.

What have the post count to do whit anything?

Lol, no drawbacks?

Well, there is the drawback of forced upgrades every 6 months... The user won't be able to pick when he is ready to upgrade, he will have to in order to get updates...

I don't get how the extra resources Canonical will get out of this will be spend on Unity or Mir... It is not the same skillset, coding and packaging... Plus since Canonical only provides security fixes it is a fairly easy job when software is old, as is always the case with Ubuntu software... Debian does most of the work anyway...

A clearly pro-company attitude and against-user attitude, when coupled with a low post count, smells troll from afar...

[e8hffff]

A little off topic, but has anyone noticed Facebook has copied Ubuntu Unity's layout, for it's new look? I hope Canonical sues them for damages as Facebook will try to claim it as their own in the future if nothing is none.

[Pajn]

Lol, no drawbacks?

Well, there is the drawback of forced upgrades every 6 months... The user won't be able to pick when he is ready to upgrade, he will have to in order to get updates...

I don't get how the extra resources Canonical will get out of this will be spend on Unity or Mir... It is not the same skillset, coding and packaging... Plus since Canonical only provides security fixes it is a fairly easy job when software is old, as is always the case with Ubuntu software... Debian does most of the work anyway...

A clearly pro-company attitude and against-user attitude, when coupled with a low post count, smells troll from afar...

As you already today have to upgrade to every single initirm release there is no difference.
And 2 months should be enough for most people to upgrade. A rolling release wouldn't be
any better either as you need to update every day.

I hope you know that when you sign up the post count start at zero. If that means that
you are a troll every one on this forum should be considered trolls. Even though a lot of
people just seems to be here to complain you shouldn't call everyone trolls.