Bugs in Dapper, should stick with Breezy ?

[Bas van Gils]

On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 12:20:46PM -0300, Thiers Botelho wrote:
[ ... ]
> Is my reasoning reasonable ? I'd appreciate any comments on my plans,
> thnx everybody.

Well.... Perhaps partially. Of course we're not sure on your plans but I'll
give you my thoughs on bugs / upgrades etc.

Before I started using Ubuntu I used a smaller Linux distro (Sourcemage) which
had a compile-everything-yourself philosophy. Pretty nice distro. At a certain
point of time one of the project leaders set out a roadmap for a 1.0 release.
Work commenced and when the deadline got close ppl started to complain about
too many open bugs. So the deadline got adjusted. And again. And again. 

The thing is, the distro was pretty usable all the time. The amount of open
bugs is, in my opinion, not so much an indication of how good a certain
distribution is. Rather it is an indicator of how actively people are
searching / have been searching for bugs. If you look hard enough I'm sure you
can find flaws in Breezy... perhaps also in Dapper but hey, many eyeballs make
all bugs shallow. The more people use Dapper, the sooner bugs will vanish.

As for deciding on Dapper versus Breezy.. I've been using ubuntu for a while
now. I've switched the day a new release was made. The *upgrade* to breezy
didnt' go to smooth for me so I had to do reinstalls and never had big
problems ever since. Just go with the flow and install updates as they come
along. It's been smooth sailing for me ever since!

Perhaps this 'll help you in making an informed decision for your specific
situation. G'luck and enjoy Ubuntu!

  Bas

-- 
<Bas.vanGils at cs.ru.nl> - GPG Key ID: 2768A493  -  http://www.cs.ru.nl/~basvg
Radboud University Nijmegen Institute for Computing and Information Sciences

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20060529/863821bd/attachment.sig>