Linked by Eugenia Loli-Queru on Mon 30th Jul 2007 21:52 UTC, submitted by da_Chicken
Debian and its clones SimplyMEPIS, a very popular desktop Linux, is going to change back to using Debian Linux for its core from Ubuntu. In March of 2006, MEPIS founder Warren Woodford, decided to switch to Ubuntu from Debian for the next version of SimplyMEPIS, version 6.0. The plan was to use Ubuntu 6.06 LTS (Long Term Service), a.k.a. Dapper Drake, as MEPIS' foundation. Things have changed.
Thread beginning with comment 259508
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Makes sense...
by apoclypse on Mon 30th Jul 2007 22:56 UTC in reply to "RE: Makes sense..."
apoclypse
Member since:
2007-02-17

That might not happen with Ubuntu but I think some of the other debian based distros should try to do this. Ubuntu is too damn big, its gotten to the point where if you see some kick ass revision of another distro come out you see like 500 different posts of people singing Ubuntu's praises. I'm an Ubuntu user and I'm probably never going to switch barring a deal with MS, but I don't have to shout my buntuphelia from every rooftop. Anyway I though it was obvious that Dapper doesn't get much more than security updates, I think that's been clear since release. Ubuntu isn't Debian, it's goal is to release a new version every six months, dapper was for those who don't need the latest and didn't want to upgrade every six months. I do think that Ubuntu should think about fixing this issue as doing a refresh every six months is getting annoying (not really I find it exciting since they usually add some pretty cool things, and I like to be surprised with the new artwork).

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2

RE[3]: Makes sense...
by mabhatter on Tue 31st Jul 2007 16:02 in reply to "RE[2]: Makes sense..."
mabhatter Member since:
2005-07-17

the Ubuntu 6 month cycle is a good trade off between the lingering "always updated, never finished" of Debian unstable and the box & bow then no more updates for years that Red Hat does. I think the 6 month cycle is starting to have the effect of pushing the maintainers to tidy up projects to a usable state in time for the Ubuntu release. Keeping the calender as much as possible helps train developers and users to work predictably, without trying to tell them what to do. Project like Debian Unstable are always held back by the slowest person to commit updates. Ubuntu is about drawing a line in the sand and dealing with it.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 1

RE[4]: Makes sense...
by neighborlee on Mon 6th Aug 2007 21:22 in reply to "RE[3]: Makes sense..."
neighborlee Member since:
2007-08-06

I dont think so at all although one easily respects the developers attempts...I see many instances of what would be considered unstable features ( and some staples of said OS ) getting into 'releases' to believe this 6 mo. cycle is all that smart longterm. I realize windows has the market share going for them and all, but they have thousands of developers working daily on their OS's and they take several years to make them. I wont accept that they are inferior coders thats obvious, so I"d love to hear views on why linux is so adept that 6 month cycles are deemed doable and wise.

Maybe if linux as a whole were less fragmented ( we have how many distros now ? ) a 6 mo cycle would make a tad more sense albeit I still doubt it.

cheers
nl

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 1