<OT> ubuntu bad press

Johnny Rosenberg gurus.knugum at gmail.com
Fri Aug 26 12:05:28 UTC 2011

2011/8/26 Graham Todd <grahamtodd2 at gmail.com>:
> On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 16:43:35 -0400
> Ric Moore <wayward4now at gmail.com> wrote:
>> The fact remains that some people have up and left and told us about
>> it. Ergo, some have up and left and said nothing. Then that article
>> came out. It all is worth ~noting~, and it may be cause to reflect if
>> we're doing the right thing by the average Joe Lunchbucket user, or
>> the system Admin who wants to install Linux as the default for a
>> small/large office setting. Are we there still? I see no crime in
>> expecting packages to be upgraded to the latest STABLE version of an
>> application, especially when they are as widely popular as Java and
>> Firefox and possibly Libre Office, ...if that is stable yet. I don't
>> think that is too much to expect from an LTS version. Again, just my
>> two cents. Ric
> As has been said, the latest versions go to the developers first so
> that they can test them for stability.  I don't know the situation with
> Ubuntu developers, but in general, developers in the open source
> environment are volunteers and I would assume that with all the flack
> flying about at the moment regarding the Ubiquity interface in the
> latest version, it would have a higher priority than LTS upgrades.
> I cannot be sure about this of course, but it seems to me to be logical
> that when a perfectly able set of applications that are however LTS, do
> not get automatically upgraded to the latest version or near-latest
> version (perhaps as a result of the effect it might have on the
> dependencies of other packages).
> Again, as has been noted, perhaps Ubuntu is not the right distribution
> for your purposes.  There are now some very decent Debian Live .iso
> downloads you can get, test and then burn them to CD or DVD if they
> are right for YOU, if you don't want to leave the apt tools formula that
> Ubuntu uses.

The reason that I suggested Arch in an earlier post was for its
rolling releases, which seemed to be what the OP indirectly asked for.
Maybe I misunderstood this completely, though.
By the way, are there any GNU/Linux-distributions with apt tools AND
rolling releases? If so, I would like to know.

Kind regards

Johnny Rosenberg

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list