Re: What's wrong with Ubuntu's policy?

Markus Hitter [2009-05-21 22:34 +0200]: > Obviously, they trust them selves to reliably avoid regressions and > trust their customers not to complain about new features. As I said, you cannot have a regression _by definition_ if you ship a new machine with that backported stuff preinstalled. Of

Re: What's wrong with Ubuntu's policy?

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Markus Hitter wrote: > > Am 21.05.2009 um 19:11 schrieb Martin Pitt: > > > Shipping a new machine with hardy plus some extra Dell repo for new > > stuff is just fine for them, if that's how they see they can benefit > > their customers best. Arguably they should a

Re: What's wrong with Ubuntu's policy?

Am 21.05.2009 um 19:11 schrieb Martin Pitt: > Shipping a new machine with hardy plus some extra Dell repo for new > stuff is just fine for them, if that's how they see they can benefit > their customers best. Arguably they should ask us to do official > backports and use those, but since we don't

Re: What's wrong with Ubuntu's policy?

Markus Hitter [2009-05-21 13:01 +0200]: > In my opinion, this is disappointing. Very disappointing. What is > wrong with Ubuntu's release/fix/backport strategy for such a thing to > happen? Nothing is wrong with our SRU policy IMHO. Shipping a new machine with hardy plus some extra Dell repo

Re: What's wrong with Ubuntu's policy?

Il giorno gio, 21/05/2009 alle 14.16 +0200, Markus Hitter ha scritto: > > Well, xorg is based on (or part of) X, which is about 20 years old. > X > was considered to be "mature" for some time, and severly behind a > few > years later. Do you really think there is something like a > "maturity"

Re: What's wrong with Ubuntu's policy?

Hey Markus, > Well, xorg is based on (or part of) X, which is about 20 years old. X > was considered to be "mature" for some time, and severly behind a few > years later. Do you really think there is something like a "maturity" > which can be reached? If not after 20 years, how long does it

Re: What's wrong with Ubuntu's policy?

Am 21.05.2009 um 13:44 schrieb Martin Owens: > Although part of me also feels that we haven't yet reached the > maturity > with a number of key foundation systems to really be sure about > deployment longevity. (i,e xorg, [...] Well, xorg is based on (or part of) X, which is about 20 years old

Re: What's wrong with Ubuntu's policy?

I find Dell's policy to be logical and fitting for what they do. But I would stress that part of what FOSS does better than all those other guys is evolution rather than large revision. I'd be a wary of breaking the 6 month release heartbeat cycle, it keeps everyone on their toes and allows for ne

Re: What's wrong with Ubuntu's policy?

Actually, it is not disappointing, it's just Dell as OEM shows us a way where we should be going to. Yes, we need to change release policy. We really need LTS every two years (and lot of small development releases between them), AND we need to overlook 'we don't release new software, just updates'

What's wrong with Ubuntu's policy?

Hello all, today it came to my attention Dell plans to do two things: a) Stick with Ubuntu 8.04 in favour of a more recent release for new machines. b) Fork the package repository to get updates out to their customers.