reflecting on first UDS session on "rolling releases"
ubuntu at kitterman.com
Mon Mar 11 15:19:01 UTC 2013
On Monday, March 11, 2013 12:40:56 AM Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
> Hi all,
> Rob wrote:
> > On 10 March 2013 14:38, Steve Langasek <steve.langasek at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> > > Our SRU policy reflects this: we only allow updates to stable releases
> > > for
> > > specific bugfixes, and don't allow other changes.
> > ... except for firefox. And kernels.
> > -Rob
> And for LibreOffice. Except that it doesnt work, when even a SRU suggested
> for the *LTS release* gets first submitted on 2012-11-02 and gets struck in
> the SRU queue so long that it receives updates on 2012-11-28, 2013-01-10
> and 2013-01-24 for additional issues found and fixed in the meantime to
> finally hit the repo on 2013-02-15 -- some three and a half months later.
> Anyone rejecting rolling releases outright for keeping 'business as usual'
> is mistaking the map for the territory.
Why didn't it get released sooner? Regressions? Lack of testing?
Telling everyone to use the development series between LTS releases won't help
More information about the ubuntu-devel