User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Shuttleworth: Not convinced by rolling releases

Shuttleworth: Not convinced by rolling releases

Posted Mar 8, 2013 2:07 UTC (Fri) by mmonaco (subscriber, #84041)
In reply to: Shuttleworth: Not convinced by rolling releases by dlang
Parent article: Shuttleworth: Not convinced by rolling releases

One major reason to do a "release" is that you'll support the included versions by packing bug-fix releases. I got the feeling from Mark's article that the hardness he was referring to was coordinating to do a release, not the difficulty of maintaining X versions of a package. Does the Ubuntu community have the manpower to maintain even more active releases? Would monthly releases mean that the non-LTS support window will be cut much shorter?

(Disclaimer: Arch Linux user)


(Log in to post comments)

Shuttleworth: Not convinced by rolling releases

Posted Mar 8, 2013 4:29 UTC (Fri) by dlang (subscriber, #313) [Link]

remember that I'm the one who suggested eventually getting to monthly releases, not Mark.

As I see it (and I could be wrong) the support time is based on allowing people who don't want to do every upgrade to upgrade at a more comfortable pace.

faster releases may eventually address that, but it will take time so I would expect that support would not shorten soon, if at all

But the conditions for going to a really fast release cycle would be that the upgrades are bulletproof for the users, so support may shorten

After all, almost all users are comfortable (and for the most part unaware) of their browsers getting upgraded at a rate that would have been unthinkable 10 years ago, but it took making the upgrade seamless for the user (and some teething problems) to get to that point.

I wouldn't expect to see any change in the pace of releases through 2014, but if they are concentrating on trying to get the releases easier and more reliable

but keep in mind, fast releases by themselves make doing upgrades easier because you don't have to change everything every release. If they were to do monthly releases they would only change kernels every 3 releases (if that frequently), same with glibc and gnome. That makes it easy to say that you don't change any two of these key components in the same release, which greatly simplifies testing, upgrades, etc

It also would greatly reduce the pressure to get something that's not really ready into a release as it doesn't hurt as much to back it out and try again in the next release (or the one after that)

It will be interesting to see what (if anything) comes out of this.

Shuttleworth: Not convinced by rolling releases

Posted Mar 8, 2013 19:13 UTC (Fri) by mike.cloaked (subscriber, #63120) [Link]

So there is a big discussion going on in the Ubuntu world about whether or not to go to a rolling release model - but right now ArchLinux is already a successful rolling release distribution. ArchLinux has excellent developers and the rolling release system works - even with occasional manual intervention needed periodically it is always very up to date without the pain of annual or more frequent complete re-installs from scratch which is a massive advantage compared to non-rolling-release-distributions. So not only is the question of whether or not it is possible to do a rolling release it is demonstrably successful!

Shuttleworth: Not convinced by rolling releases

Posted Mar 8, 2013 20:42 UTC (Fri) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link]

it is always very up to date without the pain of annual or more frequent complete re-installs from scratch which is a massive advantage compared to non-rolling-release-distributions

I use Debian, which is a »non-rolling-release-distribution«. I do not do »annual or more frequent complete re-installs from scratch«. Upgrading works just fine and has for a long time.

Debian: Rolling-release distro?

Posted Mar 11, 2013 16:28 UTC (Mon) by Max.Hyre (guest, #1054) [Link]

I use Debian as well, and I follow the unstable branch, doing a dist-upgrade every evening. How much more rolling would you like? :-)

True, I don't use it for production (read: anyone but me depends on it), and I check the list of changes before throwing the switch, because every few months there may be a case where some things would happen that I don't want to follow. Usually waiting a couple of days straightens it out.

Nonetheless, but it’s what I run on my main computer, and I don't remember the last time it was even close to being hosed— at least a couple of years.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds