Ubuntu Server page doesn't mention 10.10?

[Monte Milanuk]

On 1/18/11 6:18 AM, John Pugh wrote:
> On 01/17/2011 01:05 PM, Monte Milanuk wrote:
>> So... providing technical specifications for a given release is a
>> 'community' thing, not a job for the Server or Docs team as a routine
>> part of the release process?
>
> Correct. These are community pages. It just so happens that a Canonical
> employee updated it initially, but usually the community steps up to
> update it. I made a few changes yesterday, but did not have enough time
> to go through it in detail.
>
> These "technical specs" appear to be a listing of specific packages and
> their versions which are readily available via packages.ubuntu.com so
> I'm not sure of the usefulness?
>

I guess if someone was wanting to evaluate Ubuntu as an enterprise 
choice vs. say RHEL, SuSE or other options, having a reasonably 
up-to-date Server page with complete information would be something I 
would expect.  I was under the impression that was where Canonical was 
wanting to go with their Server version?  'Community' or no, I am a bit 
surprised the company doesn't keep up their website a little better. 
You might go to packages.ubuntu.com; I might go to DistroWatch and 
compare various distributions/releases, and someone else might have 
another way.  But neither excuses Canonical from keeping their .com site 
up to date.

YMMV.

Monte