Should upgrading be discouraged?

[craig10x]

Yes, but once the interim (6 month version) is released, it's not just for testers, developers and programmers...we are not talking about upgrading during DEVELOPMENT but after FINAL RELEASE in this thread...
I upgraded from 14.04 to 14.10 and now to 15.04 (upon final release in each case, of course) and 15.04 is the best yet in terms of stability, smoothness and snappy performance for me, so i am very glad i didn't stay on LTS...So, i would disagree that LTS is best for 99%...I also like getting newer kernels, apps and features...

Hopefully, when snappy stable is a practical option...will have a rolling stable version of ubuntu to use instead of needing to upgrade every 6 months for the latest stuff

[buzzingrobot]

I agree that 99% of the population running Canonical OSes should only use LTS versions of them.

People should use the release that best meets their requirements. If that's a non-LTS release, then that's what they should use. Personnaly, I've had as much trouble with LTS releases as with non-LTS release, and that amounts to very little trouble, indeed. It's a myth that the non-LTS releases are fragile and bug-ridden.

IMO, most problems in Ubuntu are the result of user mistakes, typically installing the wrong software from the wrong, unsupported sources, and very often forgetting it's there. Ditto any other established major distribution. They're all mature and they are all well-managed. Play by the rules and you will likely be OK.

I warn people that the interim releases between LTS versions are for developers, testers and programmers only.

See above.

Certainly anyone using a version of 15.10 (Wily) as of May 2015 outside of programmers and developers is nuts...

15.10 is a different category. It's not yet a release. Grouping it in with actual non-LTS releases is misleading. Anyone using pre-release software ought to know the risks, and anyone or any website that instructs people how to install it without telling them that is acting irresponsibly.

That said, my experience with the last few pre-release editions has been consistently rather smooth. None have broken and none have caused loss of data. At this stage, 15.10 will be essentially identical to 15.04. Change comes gradually; it's not like there's a squadron of Canonical coders that start over for every release. (15.10 will eventually see a fair amount of interesting new stuff, so down the road the pre-release may, in fact, get a bit interesting.)

[monkeybrain20122]

Only problem with non LTS is the short support cycle, so e.g 15.04 is great now but 15.10 may not be (as they are probably "previewing" a lot of not fully baked stuffs that they want to put in 16.04) Other than that I don't find LTS more stable or better performant than interim releases in general. e.g both 13.04 and 13.10 are much better than 12.04.

[mattharris4]

Hopefully, when snappy stable is a practical option...will have a rolling stable version of ubuntu to use instead of needing to upgrade every 6 months for the latest stuff

As long as Canonical completely develops and vets everything before rolling it on to general users of the OSes a rolling release plan will be convenient. Unfortunately it will only take once or twice of some programmer accidentally rolling alpha or beta code/features to general users and the code/features causing major problems for them to cause people to switch to something else in droves. I don't think I would switch to a rolling release methodology because of that. It is much safer for Canonical's reputation to vet and approve using the current system of double and triple testing with embargo dates for soon to be released versions allowing for about three weeks to re-vet the release, checking everything at least twice than with a rolling release method where any Canonical programmer could approve and send an update out.

[neu5eeCh]

Every time I've upgraded, something has gone wrong. I was just spending some time in the support threads, and there are a number of issues seemingly related to upgrades. The trouble is in knowing what is upgrade-related and what is new release related. Users write: Blahbity-blah stopped working in 15.04! Well, maybe. Ubuntu has no skin in the game, so I'd say they have no interest in the matter one way or the other. It's just all the volunteers here at the forum who are having to fix all the upgrade problems. IMHO, time would be better spent teaching users how to make fresh installs easier. I've learned to install a secondary partition which holds my home folder (sort of) via symbolic links. I only link the folders specifically related to apps whose configs I don't want to lose. It makes a fresh install considerably easier. If I were smart enough, I could probably automate the process with a batch file (as others have).

[craig10x]

One thing that was frequently mentioned is that if a package causes a regression it can easily be rolled back to the previous version...not sure exactly how that will work, though...Also, it will be thoroughly tested in the development end of snappy first, and i would imagine that when it did get pushed to stable it will have been well tested already...so that is a BIG advantage over the old style way of doing a rolling release...so i am not sure if you can really judge how this will work on the basis of the old rolling model...this is something entirely different...When was the last time an update borked your android phone? I think this will work very much in a similar way...

[Tadaen_Sylvermane]

For me anything between LTS releases has always been trouble, vanilla Ubuntu in particular. But then I've always had problems with Unity regardless of version. When I try to turn someone to Linux , or *buntu I only steer them towards the LTS releases as they have consistently given me little to no real difficulties over time. Occasionally there are glitches and such but on average LTS is rock solid for me. Might be blasphemy but I would argue LTS is almost if not more stable (only in my limited experience) than straight Debian, and has a larger repo base as well with many of the packages I need that aren't in the main Debian repos.

[CosmicFlux]

Now that 15.04 is out, we're seeing an array of complaints from people who upgraded and encountered problems. Has the time come for the major *bunutu websites to stop pushing current releases and recommend LTS versions instead? I understand the PR value of appearing to be moving forward all the time, but I also think probably 90% or more of the user base should be using LTS releases. I've even seen postings lately of people upgrading production servers from 14.04 to 15.04. Should there be more of an effort to drive most users, especially new users, to the LTS versions and away from interim releases?

I would go for a fresh install every time. As long as your using a separate /home partition your personal data will be unaffected. Upgrades can be tricky, especially if you've made fundamental modifications to the system. If the thought of doing a clean install every 6 months doesn't appeal to you then just use an LTS edition and you'll only have to do it every 5 years, or if you'd like to take advantage of new features then every LTS release.

Cosmic

[mikodo]

I stick to LTS's with fresh installs. Now, symblink / and its ~/ to data.

I had an interesting thing just happen. I only quit using 12.04 a week ago, as I couldn't find time to do it earlier. Fresh installed 14.04 on a new HD and finished with configuring Xubuntu as I like. I still use (have other plans cooking), bcrypt to encrypt an *important file that holds, contacts, emails, passwords, banking stuff, that I like to have on disk, but not readily available to an intruder or computer loss for anyone to see. I opened up the bcycrt (1.8 it turns out) , instead of the 10.04 and 12.04 bcrypt 1.6 and had added new data since this new install. Yesterday, I couldn't open it, and *eventually got a crash report that included segfaults (whatever that is). I was in good shape because I still have 12.04 on an unused HD now, with all it's apps and I could have gotten the file open after sticking it in the puter, (saved in case there were problems, in my new install). Long story shorter, I was able to *safely install briefly only bcrypt 1.6 from 12.04 repos, (cause I know how) and it opened the file fine. I am done with bcrypt now, cause I have other plans.

All that to say, that this was a very interesting thread to read, and to share the importance of having some backup plans for stuff, be it LTS, interim releases, upgrading, fresh install and probably with Snappy. Stuff, just happens.

end of rant.

[craig10x]

Well, i have now gone back to 14.04 LTS...

I will have to see if i can "resist" the temptation to return to the current 15.04 version again...I'd like to try to go on a 2 year LTS to LTS (with an upgrade to the new version) if i can...But if i do decide to move back to 15.04 i wouldn't have any hestitation to do it with 2 upgrades rather then clean install, based on my past excellent success using that method, as i previously mentioned...

Of course, if snappy personal stable is ready for prime time by 16.04 and available, if i decided to try it, i would have to do a clean install, of course...
It certainly would be interesting to try an LTS to LTS upgrade (never did one) that would be interesting to see how it would go...