I wish Ubuntu 8 .10 Intrepid Ibex can also be a LTS

[Ioky]

Haha, I know I know, Hardy Heron is not even out yet, and I wish for Intrepid Ibex. However, Intrepid Ibex do seem like a super powerful related. although the name do sound a little bit funny, but anyway.

back to the point why I want Ubuntu ii to be a LTS. It seem like at the time Ubuntu ii release, there will be a major software shift, or revolution if you want to call that. Sense Open Office 3.0, KDE 4.1, Wine1.0, Gnome2.4, and some other power software are release their major release at that point. it would be good for Ubuntu ii to also be a LTS, like Kubuntu ii

[drascus]

The only reason I disagree is that Ubuntu has a release schedule that their corporate customers expect. Not delivering on that would say that they are unreliable. Also all the big innovations generally happen during release cycle between the LTS period so that when the LTS is delivered it can be an amazing yet conservative and ultra stable system. Anyone within the LTS can always download and install those packages independently so they can still have those nice new upgrades it will just be a bit more work.

[bruce89]

If they were all LTS releases, it'd be a bit pointless having any.


Sense Open Office 3.0, KDE 4.1, Wine1.0, Gnome2.4

It'll be GNOME 2.24, not 2.4.

[Kimm]

It'll be GNOME 2.24, not 2.4.

Actually, no:

http://www.gnome.org/start/2.4/

"The GNOME 2.4 Desktop and Platform release is the latest version of the popular, multi-platform free desktop environment."

[bruce89]

Actually, no:

http://www.gnome.org/start/2.4/

"The GNOME 2.4 Desktop and Platform release is the latest version of the popular, multi-platform free desktop environment."

See http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/2.22/:


GNOME 2.22 is the latest version of the GNOME Desktop: a popular, multi-platform desktop environment for your computer.

In other words, it was correct when written. GNOME 2.4 is from 2003.

[Kimm]

See http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/2.22/:

In other words, it was correct when written. GNOME 2.4 is from 2003.

Oh, I stand corrected! :)
I thought the screenshots of Gnome 2.4 looked old...

[klange]

If you ask me, 8.04 shouldn't be. They have a beta of Firefox that won't reach final until a few months after the distro release, they're running a development release of Compiz (we won't be releasing 0.8.0 until long after Hardy comes out), it seems the default Intel set up doesn't have EXA (or XAA, or any other acceleration) enabled (and holy crap does that make things like Firefox and Gedit slow)... It's just not looking good as an LTS.

[bruce89]

If you ask me, 8.04 shouldn't be. They have a beta of Firefox that won't reach final until a few months after the distro release, they're running a development release of Compiz (we won't be releasing 0.8.0 until long after Hardy comes out), it seems the default Intel set up doesn't have EXA (or XAA, or any other acceleration) enabled (and holy crap does that make things like Firefox and Gedit slow)... It's just not looking good as an LTS.

If an LTS had stable software, people would moan a few years down the line saying "We're stuck with fx 2.0 when Windows people get 5.0? This is an outrage!".

[Polygon]

basically what bruce said, it will have a few beta programs for a month or two and then once like..firefox 3 stable comes out it will be updated in the repos.

[djbsteart1]

There was a thread about delaying the release until ff3 and what not was out, but the latest software isn't the point of a LTS release, its about stability, so having bleeding edge software that works for 5 minutes then goes **** up wont do.