View Poll Results: Yes or No?

Voters
161. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    94 58.39%
  • No

    67 41.61%
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 70

Thread: Would you prefer Ubuntu have a version that was a rolling release model?

  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: Would you prefer Ubuntu have a version that was a rolling release model?

    I can see where you're coming from. You look at Arch, or you look at Sid, and you say "wow, look at the recent versions of their packages. Ubuntu should have these as well".

    But this is not the way to go. Ubuntu has a very clear goal: to bring Linux to the mainstream desktop. This goal means taking some decisions, such as shipping with binary drivers, fitting the distribution on one CD, and keeping a reasonable level of stability. The 6-month release schedule is a key ingredient in the tradeoff between novelty and stability. Those who want bleeding edge should turn to another distribution, not try to change Ubuntu.

    OK, so what about a rolling release version as a complement to the stable releases? I don't really mind that, but I fail to see the point. User who are advanced enough to understand what "rolling release" means should no doubt be able to install Sid.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Beans
    189
    Distro
    Ubuntu 14.04 Trusty Tahr

    Re: Would you prefer Ubuntu have a version that was a rolling release model?

    Quote Originally Posted by cb951303 View Post
    simply because the first thing a sane person would do is to try another distro not going back to windows.
    A sane person will go back to what they know after having a bad experience with something they don't know. You're speaking from the viewpoint of a sane advanced linux enthusiast, not a potential "switcher" (to borrow a term), which isn't using a computer for the sake of tweaking it all day.

    So you say you just want to appeal to the advanced linux enthusiasts, and forget all the others? Last I heard, this was not what Ubuntu was aimed at doing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Erik Trybom View Post
    Ubuntu has a very clear goal: to bring Linux to the mainstream desktop. This goal means taking some decisions, such as shipping with binary drivers, fitting the distribution on one CD, and keeping a reasonable level of stability. The 6-month release schedule is a key ingredient in the tradeoff between novelty and stability. Those who want bleeding edge should turn to another distribution, not try to change Ubuntu.

    This I agree with wholeheartedly. There seems to be this notion that because Arch is so great at what it does, Ubuntu should be made to fit Arch's mold. Why? What is the benefit exactly of turning Ubuntu into an Arch-like distro, when Arch already exists?

    A rolling release model is great if you have all the time in world to tweak the configuration and back out of problematic updates, not caring so much about the need for a stable platform to work on. But that group is a microcosm of the people out there who could benefit from using Linux, and they seem to already be served well by the likes of Gentoo and Arch.
    Last edited by tubezninja; February 21st, 2009 at 06:00 PM.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    4newOtherOSTalk4umCsig
    Beans
    555

    Re: Would you prefer Ubuntu have a version that was a rolling release model?

    Quote Originally Posted by scaredpoet View Post
    A sane person will go back to what they know after having a bad experience with something they don't know. You're speaking from the viewpoint of a sane advanced linux enthusiast, not a potential "switcher" (to borrow a term), which isn't using a computer for the sake of tweaking it all day.

    So you say you just want to appeal to the advanced linux enthusiasts, and forget all the others? Last I heard, this was not what Ubuntu was aimed at doing.




    This I agree with wholeheartedly. There seems to be this notion that because Arch is so great at what it does, Ubuntu should be made to fit Arch's mold. Why? What is the benefit exactly of turning Ubuntu into an Arch-like distro, when Arch already exists?

    A rolling release model is great if you have all the time in world to tweak the configuration and back out of problematic updates, not caring so much about the need for a stable platform to work on. But that group is a microcosm of the people out there who could benefit from using Linux, and they seem to already be served well by the likes of Gentoo and Arch.
    There's also this notion that everything in the Ubuntu repos is stable because of the release cycle.

    I know from personal experience on the Kubuntu side of things that the old version of Qt they insist on using is the cause of many headaches on Kubuntu. They keep it there though as it is "stable' (read old). Also there are far more Plasma widgets on Arch than Kubuntu, as those widgets aren't yet old enough to meet the definition of "stable"....ergo there are too few useful Plasma widgets on Kubuntu.

    Also, there may be occassional oopses posted in the Arch repos...but my experience thus far has been they get fixed very quickly...which was not my expereince on *Buntu
    PhenomII 720x4@3.65gHz w/Zalman cooler,PNY Nvidia GTX260, 4GB, Arch64

    14 is NOT a random number!!!!!
    Arch Linux | new Other OS Talk forum

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Beans
    1,237
    Distro
    Ubuntu 10.04 Lucid Lynx

    Re: Would you prefer Ubuntu have a version that was a rolling release model?

    Quote Originally Posted by scaredpoet View Post
    A sane person will go back to what they know after having a bad experience with something they don't know. You're speaking from the viewpoint of a sane advanced linux enthusiast, not a potential "switcher" (to borrow a term), which isn't using a computer for the sake of tweaking it all day.
    What's this bad exp you're talking about. Rolling release doesn't mean unstable system. It is not a bug(!). it's a design choice. If ubuntu decides to go with it I highly doubt it will lead *a lot* (that's what you used) of people to return back to windows. It would simply lead them to not use ubuntu (or maybe you have heroic deduction skills that make you sure that people will use windows because ubuntu gone rolling release )

    So you say you just want to appeal to the advanced linux enthusiasts, and forget all the others? Last I heard, this was not what Ubuntu was aimed at doing.
    Wow, and now rolling releases are only for advanced linux enthusiasts? That would be purely based on arch and gentoo. I sincerely hope you don't think these are the only rolling distros that exist. Even if there are not any desktop/newbie oriented rolling distros, it doesn't mean there can't be.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Oz
    Beans
    4,405

    Re: Would you prefer Ubuntu have a version that was a rolling release model?

    Personally I don't care all that much about how cutting edge the versions of packages are in Arch.

    What I like about the rolling release system is the ease of keeping up to date (as I say, it doesn't have to be cutting edge, just moving with the general software development progression) & the lack of maintenance.

    Arch is the laziest OS I've ever used, apart from OSX (which has far too many limitations for me).

    For Ubuntu to use a rolling release system, "they" would have to develop a super easy point & click way for it to work, & for when a bug came in, for the user to be able to just as easily point & click their way back out of the bug to where they were before the system upgrade.

    Rolling release on Ubuntu without the aforementioned features would be a lost cause. imho.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Beans
    189
    Distro
    Ubuntu 14.04 Trusty Tahr

    Re: Would you prefer Ubuntu have a version that was a rolling release model?

    Quote Originally Posted by cb951303 View Post
    What's this bad exp you're talking about.
    Oh, silly me. no one has ever had a bad experience running Arch. Right then.


    Wow, and now rolling releases are only for advanced linux enthusiasts?
    The distros being compared, and the discussions of "why can't ubuntu be more like x" are indeed pointing to the distros aimed at more advanced users.

    I sincerely hope you don't think these are the only rolling distros that exist.
    You seem to think the field is crowded. Why then, should ubuntu be yet another rolling release distro? I asked this question before and it was ignored. Why should Ubuntu change its model when others are doing rolling-release so well, at least according to the opinions of its proponents?

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Beans
    6,115

    Re: Would you prefer Ubuntu have a version that was a rolling release model?

    Something in between is better, still keep current without the need of a new version.
    HOME BUILT SYSTEM! http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/22804/ Please vote up!
    remember kiddies: sudo rm -rf= BAD!, if someone tells you to do this, please ignore them unless YOU WANT YOUR SYSTEM WIPED

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    WD Caviar BLACK
    Beans
    227
    Distro
    Ubuntu 12.10 Quantal Quetzal

    Exclamation Re: Would you prefer Ubuntu have a version that was a rolling release model?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant A. View Post
    Would you prefer if there was another version of Ubuntu that used a rolling release model rather than the 6 month release period?....
    NO! Just give me stability.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Cardiff, UK
    Beans
    425
    Distro
    Ubuntu 10.04 Lucid Lynx

    Re: Would you prefer Ubuntu have a version that was a rolling release model?

    I'd have to say no. Ubuntu would be pretty boring without a shiny new release every six months. Most users don't need to be cutting edge. Releasing every six months is about right to keep users excited about Ubuntu by releasing new features, and to keep the system stable. And by stable, I don't just mean more bug-free than usual, but steady and relatively unchanging, so as not to throw users off.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Brampton, Ontario, Canada
    Beans
    216
    Distro
    Ubuntu 10.10 Maverick Meerkat

    Re: Would you prefer Ubuntu have a version that was a rolling release model?

    i think they should make a ppa repository that has all the bleeding edge updates. that way, even if you installed the bi-annual version, you will still be able to make your system bleeding edged without re-installing the entire thing. but being bleeding edged wont make much difference. if a rolling release was supported, then canonical wont get enough time to fix the issues. thats why it's better to have a 6 month release rather than rolling release. besides, ubuntu is a noob friendly distro. if it becomes rolling release, then it wont be so noob friendly.
    Last edited by HeadHunter00; July 1st, 2010 at 04:00 PM.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •