Slashdot Mirror
Canonical Could Switch To Rolling Releases For Ubuntu 14.04 and Beyond
massivepanic writes "For the longest time Canonical has slapped an LTS ("long term support") 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."
I like the idea of rolling releases, but given the amount of massively stupid crap that Ubuntu springs on us by just rolling it into a new release (unity, I'm looking at you), I also like the idea of freezing a Ubuntu box at a non-ugly release and having a box that at least receives security updates for a few years
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
It's not the new versions of existing packages that are the downside of this. It's the deal where they might roll out a whole new UI or privacy sucking 'feature'.
Right now I am sitting on 12.04 with a Gnome UI. I don't plan on going anywhere for a couple of years. When I do it's going to be a distro that makes sense, and that is likely to mean NOT Ubuntu.
the amount of bitching i hear about unity versus the amount of time it takes to install something else (TM) is ridiculous.
too lazy to apt-get install, but too vehement to shut the fuck up about it online.
nerds are strange.
If they're going to dump LTS, they need to be REAL careful about what shit they push out. I used Linux for many many years, but finally I just got tired of stuff breaking all the time, and switched to Mac OS, where Apple seems to be reasonably careful not to annoy me too much with their updates. Maybe Linux got better since then, but I doubt it judging by some of the discussions I read about on Slashdot, like massive controversies still going on about KDE vs Gnome, as well as major about faces going on WITHIN KDE and Gnome, AND talk of distros even going away from KDE and Gnone entirely. I don't mind things changing, even largish changes, but you ought to be REAL careful to make it smooth, and I don't see it happening.
"Tell me, have they ever addressed the LDAP bug that's been sitting in a queue for 2+ years."
That's impossible!
Well, they close the bugs if no further feedback is given in, what? fifteen days? or when the next release is launched.
"It's a joke distro."
Basically yes. It's a pity all that effort wasn't pushed into Debian (and in the Debian way, of course -the worst problem is that Ubuntu has pushed some of its bad manners into Debian too by means of young developers that don't know any better).
Me thinks you miss the whole point. If you piss off most of your user base the answer is not "just install something else" the answer is FIX the dang mess you made.
But I see Ubuntu swirling the drain, They are making moron decisions, and getting worse. But everyone else is as well. . Fedora 18 is also a steaming pile of doo-doo..
So Linux follows it's normal cycle of every 7 years making it crappy to the point that it get's reborn again. Mandrake was king until they pooched that one, then they died and Ubuntu rose from the ashes... Ubuntu is now pooched, so let's see who rises from the ashes this time.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I have a half dozen programmers and four (4) IT people, to support a site of several thousand hosts. Most of those hosts are in clusters, of course...
We have to verify and validate the software, put it on thousands of hosts, and then run it until the next upgrade. The name of the game is "stable". We don't want to upgrade the OS any more often than is absolutely required by the application.
Rolling releases are a complete non-starter for us. Sure, they are easier to support from the OS vendors perspective. But, they are absolutely unacceptable for customer whose primary business requirements for the platform are "stable" and "predictable".
If they don't run it, then why do they care enough to come on Slashdot and post about it every time Ubuntu is mentioned? Do they have some sort of psychiatric issue that prevents them from behaving like normal human beings?
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
If you think people commenting about Unity while not actively using it is bad, you'd better not look into the Windows 8 threads. You'd probably have an aneurysm.
I'm a big fan of long-term releases, only because I may be one of those individuals who might be responsible for systems that do not have access to the internet in order to support the "rolling release" model.
It's nice to be able to have a stable, known-good server installation on several isolated networks that just need an occasional update of dpkgs and completely expect it to work fine after it's been restarted. I don't think the same is expected in a rolling release model.
The idea that a rolling release maintains binary compatibility is, so far, been proven false. In our world, long-term releases make sense.
Kriston
Look into OpenSUSE, then.
The 11.x/12.x releases have been pretty consistently good for me.
Even better... no Unity to complain about.
(Never saw what the big buzzy was over Ubuntu in any case. I tried it a couple of times and found it marginally acceptable, but annoying.)
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
the amount of bitching i hear about unity versus the amount of time it takes to install something else (TM) is ridiculous.
I volunteer for an organization that collects old and used PCs then builds new ones with the good parts from the old ones. We then install Ubuntu. Until the start of 2013 we used Ubuntu 10.04, however with the new year we switched to Xubuntu 12.04. Some of the people in the organization don't like the new DE Canonical is using, Unity. As ease of use is one of the criteria we use, I suggested that we use Linux Mint as studies and surveys rate it as the easiest. However no one replied. Not right now, as I'm booted into Snow Leopard, but I have Ubuntu 12.04 installed on my Mac to dual-boot.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
Purely speculation here but part Steam seems to be promoting Ubuntu for their Linux-based Steam client. Games often require patching to get acceptable or optimal performance. This announcement for Rolling Releases might be directed at keeping Valve / Steam happy.
Anything that improves Linux distros is good news. However, if Steam suddenly gets 100 million Linux gamers, the sudden popularity of Ubuntu (assuming at some point Steam might only work with Ubuntu) might not work in favor of other distros. I'm concerned that it might push too much development resources to get X & Y working which is popular for the gaming community but not for all other Linux / ''Nix users (personal, business, enterprise...).