On 02/12/11 01:20, Ivan Wright wrote:
I think they needed to move on and change style, we couldn't sit with a
1995 styled OS forever.
What should be done is to do away with the six month development cycle,
which is far too short for the amount of work needed on Unity. An 8-12
month cycle would have been far better and allowed time for more bug
fixes.
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases 10.04 is a supported release to 2013 on
the desktop and 2015 on the server. In April 2012 12.04 will come out
which will be supported for 5 years. It has been 2 years to get Unity
into a state where it can go into a release that will be supported for 5
years. Ubuntu has a 6 month cycle, with a 24 month cycle on top of that.
Various people have opinions on whether that is too long and there
should be a rolling release, other people feel it is too short and
should be a 12 month release, others feel it should be a "when it's
ready" release cycle like Debian. There simply isn't one right answer to
this, different projects and distributions have different release
policies, Ubuntu has predictable releases every 6 months with an LTS
every 24 months. In terms of allowing time for bug fixing, this cycle
the builds are *much* better than last time. Precise is really quite
use-able and functional, last time most of the accessibility testing was
crammed into the end when it started working at all. I would encourage
you to give Precise a test and file bugs (if you can't find any then try
booting from a live CD, press Ctrl+S at the first installer screen then
turn your monitor off and carry on using the screen reader).
Alan.
--
Libertus Solutions http://libertus.co.uk
--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
