Avoiding fragmentation with a rolling release

Alex Chiang achiang at canonical.com
Thu Feb 28 22:05:35 UTC 2013


I am overall +1 for a rolling release for multiple reasons,
mostly for the clarity it gives...

	- to downstreams and ISVs (target the LTS for your
	  products, use 'daily' for your next-gen stuff)

	- to folks on the other side of the chasm we're trying to
	  target - use the LTS

	- to enthusiasts and developers, use the daily.

What I don't understand is the monthly snapshot:

* Rick Spencer <rick.spencer at canonical.com>:
> Matthew Paul Thomas <mpt at canonical.com> wrote:
> >
> > I don't understand why you are proposing monthly snapshots at
> > all. Can you elaborate?
> >
> The monthly snapshots would be for users who want the fresh
> software, but don't want to manage the daily grind of updating
> to ensure that their system is secure. The way I think of it is
> that we "support" 2 cadences for updates, daily and monthly.

If you want to avoid the daily grind, press the close button when
update-manager fires. Or set the 'check for updates' frequency to
monthly. I think the intended audience for monthly images could
handle that workflow.

If you want to avoid the extra bandwidth requirements for daily
updates, I think the same solution applies. Or you use the
update-manager GUI to select only the security updates and ignore
the rest.

Either way, it seems that the audience who want monthly snapshots
could achieve that cadence using mechanisms already present,
without adding extra work for the Ubuntu developer community, and
without muddying up the clarification we get with a clean "LTS or
daily" split.

The third choice (monthly) confuses me, so there must be
something I am not understanding about the potential use case.


More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list