[TEAM] Gathering "testimonials" for marketing purposes
adam1eveleigh at gmail.com
Mon Aug 8 17:07:59 UTC 2016
>From: PK <pliniusminor at gmail.com>
>I have one suggestion to make: the perceived quality of the "brand" Xubuntu
>can perhaps be improved when the only codebase is Ubuntu LTS and its point
>releases. So no more short-lived intermediate releases. Comparable with the
>release policy that Linux Mint has adopted in 2014.
I completely disagree with this. I think the current system is a great balance between those who want up-to-date software from upstream (but cohesively put together by Ubuntu and Xubuntu) and those who want to achieve stability by thoroughly testing what eventually becomes old software. Recommend LTS if you wish, but don't ditch the six-month release cycle. I try to avoid PPAs (except for software not in the repositories) for the sake of stability, but I want up-to-date software. I think sticking with interims is better than LTS+a smattering of PPAs to get stability and recent front-end software. Others will disagree, but I want this option and I think it works great for others who are willing to spend the time it takes to backup and upgrade every six months (as Ubuntu and Xubuntu work on upgrade stability, hopefully it'll become less necessary to backup each time, and then an upgrade isn't much more than a big update).
The Snappy system largely resolves this stable software vs recent software dilemma that Linux distributions suffers from, but the current system in Ubuntu does it well enough and I think just sticking with LTS alone would be a step backwards unless if Xubuntu wants to enable Ubuntu Backports as default and is willing to make the distinction between back-end and front-end software, stick to the defined distinction, and work hard with the Ubuntu Backports project to ensure that software that should be updated (like LibreOffice, GIMP, VLC - but what about Xfce software? Updating an entire desktop environment on an LTS is very bold and, if you do that, you might as well update the backend too - you might as well make a new release - yet Xfce applications are front-end ones and people will want them updated!) is updated and integrated properly to ensure stability. Alternatively, Xubuntu should somehow make Snappy the default package system for applications which use it and try to get as many front-end applications using it as possible (would probably resolve the dilemma better than LTS+interim or LTS+Backports). I'm aware that Snappy seems to take up more hard drive space than APT though, which could be a concern for Xubuntu.
Some people use Xubuntu for its stability and are happy to use older software, but some (like myself) use it more for the fact that it runs on older hardware (and maybe because it's lighter on battery and because it uses the traditional desktop metaphor, largely, and it's generally faster).
I realise that this is a big and wide debate, but I strongly disagree with going just with LTS unless if significant effort is put into Ubuntu Backports (as far as I know, Backports aren't frequently updated) or Xubuntu adopts Snappy (which could have hard drive size issues).
(I use Xubuntu 16.10 on my RM CL 51-15, though not very often now, I admit, because I have a newer laptop with Ubuntu 16.04. Willing to test on 16.10 if there's something that needs testing though, spare hardware woop!)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the xubuntu-devel