Kubuntu 10.04 will be LTS but it is ready for that
ubuntu at kitterman.com
Fri Feb 26 02:35:27 GMT 2010
"pan shizhu" <pan.shizhu at gmail.com> wrote:
>> So my query is: is it the right time to go LTS? ... As I understand it... I am just a fairly techie user.
>When we speak LTS it is a very wide concept, consider this:
>1. Most ubuntu mirrors will provide LTS mirror in its life-cycle (3-5
>years), while non-LTS versions will be removed after 18 months (this
>is true for many mirrors).
>2. The most important part for any Linux distribution is the
>availability of repository.
>So, even if Kubuntu 8.04 choose not to go for LTS, it is still LTS
>anyway. Because kubuntu 8.04 users get security upgrades for kernel
>and system base, and the repository lasts for 5 years.
>For most average users, 5 years availability of local mirror
>repository is most important, and if Kubuntu choose a different
>version from 10.04 as LTS, user will not get any benefit. Since many
>local mirrors will delete the packages of non-LTS versions after 18
>month, and the kernel/base support of non-10.04 version is poor.
>IMO an operating system provides a solid base I can run my application on.
>So I think Kubuntu 10.04 has to be LTS regardless of any point. since
>LTS mean the support of the whole system, not the support of the
>desktop environment only.
>> Would it maybe be better to wait for SC 4.5 with, hopefully, more of
>> those issues fixed?
>Being LTS does not mean feature freeze. we can provide SC 4.5 in
>lucid-backport anyway. The most import thing for LTS is a stable
>kernel and base tools (gcc, libc, python, etc.), the desktop
>environment is pretty much an application, I expect upgrades and
>occasional failures and I can live with it.
The biggest practical advantage we get from LTS is point updates to the Kubuntu ISO images. Your assessment of the situation with the repositories is dead on IMO.
There are marketing / perception advantages too, but that's kind of a different topic.
More information about the kubuntu-devel