| |||||||||||||
Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release modelUbuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release modelPosted Mar 1, 2013 4:08 UTC (Fri) by AndreE (subscriber, #60148)Parent article: Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release model
I can't help but think that the rolling release is a far too heavy handed way of solving the issue of outdated software (which I'm going to assume is a big motivation). It's clear that some OS components should be on a conservative update path, whereas for others this is not hugely important. I've always like the FreeBSD dichotomy of system and world, and it would make a lot of sense to keep "system" relatively stable between releases whilst allowing the software in "world" to updated on a rolling basis. To me it makes sense that your display server or sound framework would have different updating policies to your IDEs, video players, and web browsers.
(Log in to post comments)
Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release model Posted Mar 2, 2013 11:09 UTC (Sat) by giner (guest, #89643) [Link]
> To me it makes sense that your display server or sound framework would have different updating policies to your IDEs, video players, and web browsers.
Make sense for home user but would be nightmare for huge enterprise installations. Even when Firefox updates from 18 to 19 for 100 users at the same time we can have 100 issues with a "corporate self-developed extension".
Ubuntu discussing moving to LTS + rolling release model Posted Mar 3, 2013 2:50 UTC (Sun) by AndreE (subscriber, #60148) [Link]
Well, in the corporate case a rolling distribution is even worse. No corporation is ever going to move to a rolling release distro for their mainstream users if they find my a rolling world/system delineation too disruptive.
In any case, there is nothing preventing POLICY mechanisms being implemented anyway to prevent updates not pushed by the administrators. That's how it works in all enterprises and corporations I have worked in (using Windows and Linux desktops) : user very rarely have the ability to update software themselves, it is all handled centrally by the system administrators.
|
|||||||||||||