Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 29th Jul 2009 09:50 UTC, submitted by kragil
Debian and its clones Most mainstream distributions, like Ubuntu, Fedora, and Mandriva, have already adopted a time-based release schedule, meaning that releases are not done on a feature basis, but according to a pre-determined time schedule. The Debian project has announced that it has adopted a time-based release schedule too.
Thread beginning with comment 375889
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Mark Shuttleworth to "blame"
by kragil on Wed 29th Jul 2009 10:09 UTC
kragil
Member since:
2006-01-04

This schedule will align Debian Stable very close to what an Ubuntu LTS will ship.

It will be interesting to see if Ubuntu will ship the Debian versions of the Kernel and Gnome. That would be a fairly major shift towards stability. I would love that for LTS releases.

Reply Score: 4

mgl.branco Member since:
2009-07-22

True. Shuttleworth is the one to blame. Debian move is a capitulation to Ubuntu... and I don't think it's for the best. I just hope they know what they do and still focus on quality, not anyone's marketing needs.

IMHO, I don't think that a strict, or semi-strict like now Debian's, release cycle is productive, at least with short cycles, and I believe is detrimental first to stability and second to innovation. I wish I'm wrong here.

I say this because I think that Ubuntu has been living up until now on the fruits of Debian and not on any merit derived from decision making in the distro, aside of marketing, obviously. As an example of bad administration, language packs in launchpad are NOT sync with upstream. My upstream KDE translations, for example, are not sync back and forth in Ubuntu. This is horribly insane.

Edited 2009-07-29 14:22 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

kenji Member since:
2009-04-08

I think that desktop linux users are to 'blame', not Shuttleworth although placing blame seems too severe at this point. Fedora, Mandriva and Ubuntu all have 'regular' release intervals and that is what desktop users have come to expect. If anything this move is to bring some Ubuntu users (and other desktop users) to Debian, not to bow to Ubuntu.

Honestly the erratic release cycle of debian is the largest hurdle keeping me away from it.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: Mark Shuttleworth to "blame"
by matej on Thu 30th Jul 2009 06:16 in reply to "Mark Shuttleworth to "blame""
matej Member since:
2007-05-27

@kragil: the three-letter acronym in "Ubuntu LTS" stands for "Long Term Support" instead of "Long Term Stability".

This means users of this release will receive updates over an extended time frame compared to other Ubuntu releases. Also, commercial support can be paid over a longer time frame.

Accordingly, there is *NO* reason why an LTS release would be designed to be more stable than any other Ubuntu release. In fact, there is no guarantue that an LTS release will give you additional stability and I believe some people experienced more stability issues just after release of Ubuntu 8.04 LTS than just after release of Ubuntu 7.10.

To summarize, *all* Ubuntu releases are designed with the same quality testing procedures. Hence, the only reason why there may be differences in stability between releases is statistical.

PS: of course LTS may become on average more stable at the end of their lifetime as they receive updates over a longer timeframe. So yes, you will statistically get more stability, but only if you only install the LTS release about 16 months (*) after its initial release date.

(*I believe this is how long normale Ubuntu releases are supported?)

Reply Parent Score: 1