> Timo Aaltonen wrote: > Because just to get it all built on xenial takes time. Then after it's > all good on a staging ppa it'll get pushed to xenial-proposed. Once all > the dozens of packages have been reviewed and ACKed, it needs testing. > It also takes time. > > So no, I have zero interest in doing -edge copies of the X stack. Feel > free to test the staging ppa if you want. You'll know when it's > available. (hint: later this month)
Well, might as well make Ubuntu a rolling release then. Instead of "wasting" time to release a new graphics stack for 16.10/17.04/17.10 and then backport it to 16.04, you could as well just have dropped 16.10/17.04/17.10 and only release it for 16.04. I really don't get why we even have releases in between. Most people are not using them anyway and only use the LTS releases and kinda keep them updated via PPAs and HWE packages. Maybe now that you have changed directions and ditched Unity, maybe it would be a good time to also ditch the usual release cycle and go for a rolling release cycle. Instead of pointing your users to PPAs or telling them to have to wait, you could just have them stay on one rolling release and have them roll along. I mean, think about it: You do a 16.10/17.04/17.10 release, then prep a PPA each time, then prep a HWE edge stack each time (in case of the Kernel), then prep a HWE stack each time. So much wasted time basically. Could have just put all of this work into keeping 16.04 up to date instead. PS: When I say "keeping 16.04 up to date" obviously I mean keeping Ubuntu up to date, since there would be no "16.04" when Ubuntu would be a rolling release. -- Ubuntu-x mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-x
