Ubuntu 13.04 and "Rolling Development"

[jerrylamos]

I'm using "unstable" development ubuntu mostly, with fallback to "stable LTS" partition for when I'm doing something important or "unstable" is really "unstable".

On a "rolling release" how do you tell what is "stable LTS" install and what is "shaky unstable" development?

[zika]

I'm using "unstable" development ubuntu mostly, with fallback to "stable LTS" partition for when I'm doing something important or "unstable" is really "unstable".

On a "rolling release" how do you tell what is "stable LTS" install and what is "shaky unstable" development?

Shake it?

[EgoGratis]

On a "rolling release" how do you tell what is "stable LTS" install and what is "shaky unstable" development?

It's pretty easy to tell... When it doesn't work as you would expect it to work then you are on "development release" and when it works as expected then it's "stable LTS". You can't go wrong.

[zika]

It's pretty easy to tell... When it doesn't work as you would expect it to work then you are on "development release" and when it works as expected then it's "stable LTS". You can't go wrong.

But lately we have more stable development releases than previous stable releases...

[EgoGratis]

I will wait to see what approach will Mir take on GPU drivers (blobs) on desktop and after that it will be easier to agree/disagree with that statement. For now i would not be comfortable to put Ubuntu Rolling (current RR development release) on PC from regular PC users i know. If only FOSS drivers coudl be used (Intel and some AMD) then maybe it could work but until then (Mir) i think latest Ubuntu LTS release or interim releases are better suited for regular users and probably are more stable too.

[craig10x]

zika has a good point there...
except for a few "glitches" along the way, 13.04 development has been more stable and bug free then my previously installed "stable" 12.10...

while i think i'd want to give a newbie to linux a regular release (like 12.04 or 12.10 or 13.04 when it final releases) for someone who has been using linux and/or ubuntu for a while, i am getting the impression that ubuntu RR development would be ok to use for a main system for us more "seasoned" users...when an occasional glitch comes along, with a bit of feedback from other users we seem to usually figure out how to solve it...and the occasional minor breakage (like when i lost my vlc sound) seems to get fixed pretty quickly on the ubuntu end...

[EgoGratis]

zika has a good point there...
except for a few "glitches" along the way, 13.04 development has been more stable and bug free then my previously installed "stable" 12.10...

I don't share that enthusiasm i think RR is OK for "development release" expectations but then the reality kicks in.

Bugs:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2121960

GPU (blobs) driver issues support on "moving target" and lack of support for software that doesn't comes directly from UCS... It's not production ready and Ubuntu 12.04 for example kicks RR (dev) a...

while i think i'd want to give a newbie to linux a regular release (like 12.04 or 12.10 or 13.04 when it final releases) for someone who has been using linux and/or ubuntu for a while, i am getting the impression that ubuntu RR development would be ok to use for a main system for us more "seasoned" users...when an occasional glitch comes along, with a bit of feedback from other users we seem to usually figure out how to solve it...and the occasional minor breakage (like when i lost my vlc sound) seems to get fixed pretty quickly on the ubuntu end...

Yes 1% of "us geeks" would probably manage to pull this off and that is about it and other 99% need more "long-term" relationship.

P.S. Love and caring and commitment and stability and Mir and Unity...

[EgoGratis]

I will say it again Ubuntu needs to focus JUST on LTS for at least 18 months and do there what is possible then move further to next LTS. Ubuntu is operating system and not web browser.

P.S. Everything else is just for "us geeks" (interim included)!

[Gyokuro]

Maybe it is good to mimic the development of Debian - LTS is stable and testing for a rolling development with weekly snapshots to minimize the download amount for updated applications. I think with this approach you do not need the interim releases between LTS releases anymore.

[craig10x]

Maybe it is good to mimic the development of Debian - LTS is stable and testing for a rolling development with weekly snapshots to minimize the download amount for updated applications. I think with this approach you do not need the interim releases between LTS releases anymore.

Yes, and actually ubuntu development has daily iso images that are up to date...so when initially installing with it, you don't get hit with tons of updates...

I use to run LMDE (linux mint's debian version pointed to "testing") and actually had more problems over in that...ubuntu has managed to get the automated "quality control" process working to the point that updates in development have become pretty reliable...with only a "glitches" popping up occasionally...which are generally pretty easily straightened out...