Bug 0 review pls

[Anders Häggström]

2008/6/3 Daniel Robitaille <robitaille at gmail.com>:
> On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Matt Darcy
> <ubuntu.lists at projecthugo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> 2.) LTS fixes and backports. There is no enough fixes, updates and
>> upgrades to make LTS a viable long term (3 year) stratergy for business
>> use. Too much focus is on "fix for next release" or "upgrade product for
>> next release", which relates to point 1. If a server model is to be
>> considered usable it needs to have regular fixes applied to that
>> release, not pushed out into current +1. I understand why this is done
>> as unless the bug is mission critical it makes more sense from an ubuntu
>> standpoint to target the fix into the next release, as that release will
>> have updates in and is less than 6 months away. This is not an option
>> for a long term server audience. The 6.06 release was crippled on later
>> edition dell servers due to the lack of back ports on the kernel for
>> specific hardware controllers, if the LTS edition is to be truly LTS,
>> then I'm afraid kernel updates/back-ports will need to be on the radar
>> more, and things learnt from the non-LTS products need to be pushed back.
>
> Being the owner of a Dell server running 7.04 because that was the
> only version of Ubuntu that could deal with its hardware when it was
> set up in the spring of 2007, I totally agree with that paragraph.
> Doing a double upgrade (7.04 to 7.10 to 8.04) on a production box is
> not something I look forward in the next 6 months I have before
> Feisty's support runs out.   Given the choice last year, we would have
> used an older LTS version instead of a currenty  non-LTS version, but
> we simply didn't have the option while continuing using Ubuntu.
>
> Daniel
>
> --
> Daniel Robitaille
>  http://friendfeed.com/robitaille
>
> --
> ubuntu-server mailing list
> ubuntu-server at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
> More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
>

I am an Ubuntu user (both desktop and server platforms) and I want to
give my point of view. When I install a server with LTS I want to be
able to update bugs found in the software for the whole LTS-period. If
I install a new server (with fresh hardware) in the middle of an
LTS-period I want to be able to use the last released LTS-release and
upgrade drivers to support my new hardware that was not supported when
the LTS-release was first released. I do not want to install a normal
release just because the LTS-resease didn't support my hardware at the
release time (when for example my hardware was not manufactured yet).

For the GUI discussion I don't want the server depending on Xorg. I
would rather see a good integrated webinterface with little overhead
and nice ajax-applications for various tasks on the server.

Thanks for your time!
// Anders