On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 15:35:50 +0000 Scott James Remnant <sc...@canonical.com> wrote: >On Tue, 2009-02-10 at 16:31 +0100, Markus Hitter wrote: > >> Undoubtly, efforts to avoid regressions are a very good thing. One >> possible solution is to offer the possibility to roll back to or keep >> the previous technology. Perhaps you want to have a look at other >> distros to get an idea on how they deal with this challenge: >> >As far as I'm aware, there aren't any distributions doing 6-monthly >releases that deal with this challenge. > >Those that do use longer release cycles, with more time for testing and >bug fixing. > >(Indeed, the most obvious other distribution that performs a 6-monthly >release - Fedora - is arguably even more bleeding edge and less >conservative than we are!) > True, but Fedora is meant to be a bleeding edge distro that feeds into Red Hat's actual product. For Ubuntu (at least historically) each relaease IS the product.
It sounds like we are evolving to a model of three Fedora releases followed by a RHEL release. If that's the case, I guess it just needs to be more clearly communicated. Scott K -- 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
