What's wrong with Ubuntu's policy?

Markus Hitter mah at jump-ing.de
Thu May 21 20:34:23 UTC 2009

Am 21.05.2009 um 19:11 schrieb Martin Pitt:

> Shipping a new machine with hardy plus some extra Dell repo for new
> stuff is just fine for them, if that's how they see they can benefit
> their customers best. Arguably they should ask us to do official
> backports and use those, but since we don't throw a lot of QA at them,
> they don't lose much with doing them themselves.

 From the article:

> We go the extra mile in double qualifying all updates (that one  
> would see in stock 8.10 and 9.04) and only publish those that are  
> rock-stable.

To me, this sounds much like a fork of Ubuntu, just without a new  
name. Stick with 8.04 as a base, re-do all changes from there on.  
Have fun with people mixing up Canonical-Ubuntu with Dell-Ubuntu.

> But it's a totally different thing to impose that new stuff as forced
> updates to _existing installations_, especially with LTS.

Obviously, they trust them selves to reliably avoid regressions and  
trust their customers not to complain about new features. We'll see.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dipl. Ing. Markus Hitter

More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list