On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 2:14 AM, Alex Cockell <alcock...@eclipse.co.uk> wrote: > Hi folks, > > First of all - I am your putative end-user. I bought my Thinkpad R61i > from Linux Emporium with standard 8.04 Desktop preinstalled (off > Canonical's repos - not a downstream version like Mint or Dell's own), > and only use software out of Canonical's official repos. I'm also going > to be VERY nervous when it comes to a major version upgrade, to the > point where I might end up buying a new laptop if replacing the OS > didn't go swimmingly. > > In fact, during a phone conversation with LE, they generally recommend > clean reinstalls for major OS upgrades. > > It's therefore obvious that I'm an LTS-LTS user, and would be too scared > to step away from that - although some laptops in LE's range have had to > have the most recent regular release put on them as earlier versions > wouldn't start or notice all the hardware. > > Ubuntu is becoming more known by the mainstream - we end-users just want > machines that *work*. Might some slight changes into how certain > enhancements are introduced be an idea? > > For example - is new hardware support regularly SRU'd back into the > current LTS release, after decent QA? Or is it the case that if there > was hardware that was newer than the release level (eg if I bought a new > lappie and managed to get a restricted level of functionality with > Hardy..) I would have to wait a year for a new component to start > working? > > But it's scary to see showstoppers (or what we users would see as > showstoppers) going into a Gold release, rather than spinning a revised > RC. The last thing Canonical needs is for Karmic to be its KDE 4.0, > considering all the bad press that caused. > > Maybe the idea of the 6-month releases being advertised as "major > development milestones" is one to consider. > > All I am saying is please don't let Lucid break my machine when I come > to upgrade to it around July next year... > > Just thoughts from one of your user community. > > Alex Cockell > > -- > > Alex Cockell > Reading, Berks, UK > alcock...@eclipse.co.uk > > > -- > Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list > Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss >
I suggested at least a year ago that modifications be made to the development and maintenance schedule for releases, such as 6 month lifetimes for non-LTS releases, and using LTS-1 releases as the base for LTS instead of syncing with Debian-Unstable. I do truly hope that the next 'new-feature-packed' Ubuntu release is Manic Manatee, as Lucid should be a stabilization period. That said, LTS's do have two beta releases and fewer alphas, which mean longer freeze times and bug fixes instead of frantically uploading the latest daily tar.gz of any given piece of software. In theory. Your point about SRU'ing hardware support to LTS is well taken by me, but I don't understand. Are you implying something is wrong with Karmic, or are you simply stating your dissatisfaction with hardware support in Hardy? -- Luke L. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
