On Mon, 2016-07-11 at 10:34 +0100, Robie Basak wrote: > but see: reality
I only see an advantage for Ubuntu LTS releases. For regular Ubuntu releases, let alone rolling releases, such as Arch, this approach IMO is a step into the wrong direction. I consider to use it for my Ubuntu LTS, but just for exceptions, if it really should make sense, otherwise it wouldn't make sense to stay with an LTS at all. Sometimes this approach could be useful to provide some kind of long term support within regular Ubuntu releases or rolling release distros. OTOH there already is the option to chose between LTS releases and releases that are closer to upstream, mixing LTS and non-LTS IMO only is useful for exceptions. If it's done on a regular basis, it might not necessarily directly affect security, but it affects the way the community works. A distro might provide a buggy package and instead of reporting bugs, users simply snap something from upstream or a third party. The installs become rag rugs, users don't share similar set ups anymore, communities as we know them today will die out. Instead of distros, with different targets, it leads to a vast, chaotic community without a clear target. Such containers are garden fence inside user space. This is what makes restricted operating systems less good, than open operating systems. This is my POV without even having tested Snappy or something similar. I might change my mind after I have tested it. However, I'm sceptic. Regards, Ralf -- 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
