[ubuntu-studio-devel] How would it be if we had fewer releases? Say, only one per year?

[lukefromdc at hushmail.com]

That's similar to Mint's path, as they are are switching to  basing only on
LTS releases with backports at least through 16.04. This even though they
will still do a release of their own every 6 months.

On 8/26/2014 at 12:32 PM, "Kaj Ailomaa" <zequence at mousike.me> wrote:
>
>I was thinking today about the possibility of not releasing a new 
>ISO
>every 6 months, and instead focus more on the LTS releases. For 
>example,
>we could release only once every year, or once every two years, 
>even.
>
>But, what would this mean for Ubuntu Studio?
>
>* Users would still be able to upgrade to a newer release, just 
>not be
>able to do a fresh install from ISO (since Ubuntu Studio is in 
>fact just
>another flavor of Ubuntu)
>* We would still need to keep our packages up to date for every 
>Ubuntu
>vanilla release (so, in fact, we don't actually save much work)
>* Instead of QA testing our ISO, we would need to QA test the 
>upgrade -
>as that would be the primary way to get the most recent release. 
>This
>could very well be more problematic than doing a fresh 
>installation.
>* We could focus more on backporting packages to the LTS release, 
>though
>this works best for packages that don't need the latest versions 
>of its
>dependencies. The kernel will be backported from now on, so a LTS 
>user
>will always have access to the latest kernel.
>* In the end, the change might be more psychological, telling the 
>user
>to stick with their LTS releases.
>
>Any opinions?
>
>-- 
>ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list
>ubuntu-studio-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
>Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
>https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel