Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 23rd Jan 2013 18:21 UTC, submitted by Anonymous
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu "For the longest time Canonical has slapped an LTS moniker on some of their Ubuntu releases. Currently, a new major release of the operating system happens every six months, and is supported for 18 months after release. Whereas in the past when LTS versions received two years support or more, the current model - starting with 12.04 - supports new LTS releases for five years. However, a recent public Google Hangouts session revealed that Canonical has been thinking about switching from the venerable LTS model to a rolling release, starting with version 14.04."
Thread beginning with comment 550115
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Might as well
by ssokolow on Wed 23rd Jan 2013 19:25 UTC in reply to "Might as well"
ssokolow
Member since:
2010-01-21

Ubuntu's already the most unstable Linux distribution out there, might as well go all the way with that. They've got nothing to lose, except for their users. It's not as if anyone else takes Ubuntu seriously.


Trust me. It's NOT the most unstable distro out there.

As a skilled Gentoo user, I can honestly say that a rolling-release, build-from-source distro which encourages end-user customization of compile-time flags will always be more unstable on average.

...if for no other reason, because each Gentoo user makes half of the set of decisions an Ubuntu maintainer does and there's no tooling in place to allow us to share information on which configurations will cause instability under which circumstances.

Reply Parent Score: 8

RE[2]: Might as well
by Morgan on Wed 23rd Jan 2013 22:21 in reply to "RE: Might as well"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

I have to agree, though my experience is with Arch and not Gentoo. They share a similar problem with occasional breakage though, from what I understand.

I will say, however, that the Arch maintainers always warn before breaking things and always have a fix either already in the pipe or at least on the way. When I ran it as my main OS, I tried to hold back the urge to type sudo pacman -Syu until I saw the fixes had been implemented.

So if Ubuntu goes for a rolling release model, I hope they are ready for the surge of hate from users too lazy or simply unaware of the need to check release notes before updating.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Might as well
by orestes on Thu 24th Jan 2013 01:40 in reply to "RE[2]: Might as well"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

I've always found Arch remarkably stable, provided one pays attention to what they're doing. I can't really think of the last time something unexpected has happened that I couldn't trace back to being my own fault.

That said, rolling doesn't necessarily equate to Arch's bleeding edge style. If Ubuntu's smart it'll take a much slower and more measured pace.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Might as well
by darknexus on Wed 23rd Jan 2013 23:34 in reply to "RE: Might as well"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

"Ubuntu's already the most unstable Linux distribution out there, might as well go all the way with that. They've got nothing to lose, except for their users. It's not as if anyone else takes Ubuntu seriously.


Trust me. It's NOT the most unstable distro out there.

As a skilled Gentoo user, I can honestly say that a rolling-release, build-from-source distro which encourages end-user customization of compile-time flags will always be more unstable on average.

...if for no other reason, because each Gentoo user makes half of the set of decisions an Ubuntu maintainer does and there's no tooling in place to allow us to share information on which configurations will cause instability under which circumstances.
"
Fair point, I don't really think of build from source distributions in the same way I think of pre-built ones like Ubuntu, Debian, etc, so I wasn't including them. On the flip side though, if you know what you're doing, you can get those to be rock solid stable.

Reply Parent Score: 1