LTS and release methodology
par.liden at gmail.com
Thu Jul 10 20:55:37 UTC 2008
2008/7/10 Matt Zimmerman <mdz at ubuntu.com>:
> > The important point is that a normal user should not need to hang out on
> > forums, mailing list, LP, and so on, to know if the release is stable
> > to use. IMHO, it should be enough to see from the name if the release is
> > ready-for-use. For me (and probably many others) the name 8.04 Long Term
> > Support communicates a message that it is so stable.
> I by no means imply that 8.04 was not ready to use. There were some flaws,
> which there always are in software releases, and in my view we addressed
> them appropriately with updates and 8.04.1.
> To you, "LTS" may mean "so stable", but to another, it means that problems
> are actively fixed (which implies some change and therefore instability)
> even after release. One thing it can never mean is that there are no bugs
> in it, for that is a practical impossibility.
After some thought, I'd like to clarify on this one: instead of writing
"ready-to-use" I should have written "few bugs are encountered for the
average user in their normal tasks". Those releases on which I have
encountered the least bugs are Dapper and Feisty (and I think many would
agree with me). So maybe a (somewhat subjective) way of defining "few bugs"
would be "as few as on Dapper or Feist for the averagre user". And IMHO, and
from what I've read on the Internet, Hardy exceeded that, and that's not
what I (and many others) would except when the release has "LTS" in its
However, 8.04.1 works very good for me, and I'm very satisfied that with the
path Ubuntu has taken with regular support releases, working on and fixing
bugs also after the release. Maybe it's not so important that that the first
Hardy release was a bit buggy, whats more important is that those issues are
being adressed. And that is exactly what is happening now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss