> LTS is Long Term Support - therefore, LTS (U/Kubuntu > 6.06 is supported upto 2009 (36 months) for security > (and other) updates fro the desktop edition, whereas > the server edition is supported upto 2011 (5 years).
What does "support" refer to? That Ubuntu provides security patches etc. for this period? The problem still remains that a lot of software gets outdated sooner than the "long-term" and later versions accessible only through backports. I would not want to use 6.06 until 2009, when later and hugely improved versions of various packages and ubuntu itself are available. A user has two options: use a long-term version which has a release cycle of 3/5 years or use short-term versions which have a release cycle of 6 months. Let me reiterate my view: Ubuntu needs medium-term releases with a more liberal upgrading policy in between these releases. These medium-term releases should replace the present 6-monthly releases. Also, it was mentioned in a post as part of this thread how an upgrade gives you a system very different from a fresh install. That is indeed true and, in my view, a weakness that Ubuntu needs to attend to. Debian would be better on this. You will never need to do a fresh install of a debian system because upgrade is not as good as a fresh install. My intention is not to get into a debian v/s ubuntu debate. Vikas _______________________________________________ ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Next Event: http://freed.in - February 22/23, 2008 Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/
