More updated package systems that are are independent of ubuntu versions

[Avi Greenbury]

Peng Yu wrote:
> In that sense, shouldn't a core set of essential packages be defined
> for ubuntu as the core OS.

Perhaps. I'm intrigued, though - what is it here that's out-of-date
and what features are you missing?

> Other non essential packages as add-ons, so that they can be
> independently updated non matter what version the core OS is. If
> there were anything that the should be improved on ubuntu, this
> probably should be an important aspect to be improved.

You would, then, need to both maintain the full set of packages
supplied on release *and* keep the non-core set continually-updated,
and ensure compatibility between the two, which would be difficult.

It sounds like you're after a rolling-release distro rather than one
following the stable-release model that Ubuntu employs.

> I'm not sure who is directly in charge of this issue so that I can
> send the suggestion to.

It's a suggestion that crops up quite frequently, but I don't really
think there's much chance of Ubuntu dropping the stable-release model,
especially now that they're targeting businesses who would expect to
be able to predict the versions of software they're running while
getting security updates.

-- 
Avi