What's wrong with Ubuntu's policy?

[Evan R. Murphy]

2009/5/21 Markus Hitter <mah at jump-ing.de>:
[snip]
>  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.
[snip]

2009/5/22 Daniel Chen <seven.steps at gmail.com>:
[snip]
> "Downstreams" should feel free to adopt whatever policies suit them.
> (Think Ubuntu's downstream relation to Debian, and Debian's downstream
> relation to all upstreams.)

Well, it would be great to avoid all the duplication of effort we can.
If Dell really is double-testing updates for stability, the results of
those tests could be useful to Ubuntu proper, so long as they're
willing to share. Whatever energy Dell is putting into the prep of
their Ubuntu machines should be coordinated as much as possible with
the community, IMO.

I hope my comment is welcome here. I don't think I've introduced
myself to the list before, but I've been following for some time.

Best Regards,
Evan R. Murphy