reflecting on first UDS session on "rolling releases"

[Scott Kitterman]

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 
this.

Scott K