making a workaround web page for bugs, in LTS release, not fixed

[Charlie Kravetz]

On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 15:51:07 -0500
John Moser <john.r.moser at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 6:53 AM, Marco Pallotta <marco.pallotta at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Often Ubuntu users (expecially new users or user that doesn't know
> > much of Ubuntu bug fixing procedure) are disoriented by the fact that
> > bugs, in LTS releases, aren't fixed (or they are marked as "fix
> > released" if they aren't present anymore in next Ubuntu releases)  if
> 
> I'm still surprised that supposedly supported versions don't have bug fixes.
> 
> You get these kinds of reports:
> 
>  - 7.10 is a great release
>  - 8.04 is the worst crap I've ever seen, everything is broken
>  - 8.10 is an amazing release, with all the broken crap in 8.04 fixed
> 
> And you get a point in time where this becomes true:
> 
>  - 7.10 has mostly working software.
>  - 8.04 has about half its software still broken
>  - 8.10 has all those bugs from 8.04 AND 7.10 fixed, and all its software works
>  - To get any of 2 or 3 dozen apps in 8.04 to work, you should upgrade to 8.10
>  - To get any of 1 or 2 apps in 7.10 to work, upgrade to 8.10
> 
> Ubuntu has had at least one release that was hailed as the biggest
> mistake in history, where the entire system seemed duct taped together
> and very basic functionality was largely broken.  Python errors got
> spit out by things like Serpentine.  Some apps crashed.  The MP3
> encoder crashed immediately if you fed it output from oggdec (gtkpod
> thus didn't function).  The kernel wasn't even stable on some systems,
> due to a scheduler bug or something non-trivial along those lines.  I
> think that was 8.10?
> 
> When I finally upgraded, everything was still broken in the old
> version, and everything was working in the new version.  Last I
> looked, everything was still broken in that version.
> 
> My question is:  do such versions of Ubuntu remain broken and
> dysfunctional until they're no longer supported?  Is this proper?  Or
> should fixes get backported to all supported releases AND LTS such
> that the oldest version always has the fewest problems, but also fewer
> features?
> 

Ubuntu bugsquad already has a policy that workarounds should be
identified and moved into the bug description. If that was happening,
it should be easy to grab the section labeled "WORKAROUND:", right?

-- 
Charlie Kravetz 
Linux Registered User Number 425914          [http://counter.li.org/]
Never let anyone steal your DREAM.           [http://keepingdreams.com]