Idea #2782: New yearly versions instead of half-year

-150

Written by ranser the 3 Mar 08 at 16:34. Category: System.
Related to: Nothing/Others. Status: New

Description

After and update broke my sound a developer on a forum said they are pressed with time (and testing) and that's why it happens to see bugs from 3 years ago come back and haunt. I propose to have maybe one version per year but with more extensive testing and with more new features, more revolutionary. As it is now I don't see much difference between Feisty and Gutsy.

Tags: (none)

Attachments

No attachments.

Duplicates

Idea #1341: Bugfixing and stability (-42 votes)

Idea #7665: Have Future Ubuntu Versions Not Released Every 6 Months (-48 votes)

[Report a duplicate and merge its votes to this idea]

Comments

pturing wrote on the 3 Mar 08 at 17:12

6 month releases are one of the things many people love about Ubuntu.

If you're looking for maximum stability and don't care about having the latest features, I would recommend you try Redhat Enterprise Linux, or CentOS. RHEL 4u6 / Centos 4.6 is extremely stable.

Also, you might try running only the LTS versions of Ubuntu, which exist for this reason.

chrissla wrote on the 3 Mar 08 at 17:36

I´m working for a software company. one year releases? that´s not possible. as you wish to have more features it won´t change anything.

less features < - > more features
half year < - > one year

it´s all the same. justr before a new release there is stress in testing and fixing.

XSP wrote on the 3 Mar 08 at 18:13

Nobody is forcing you to update either. If you want to skip a release, go for it.

Auzy wrote on the 8 Mar 08 at 06:01

1 year is way too long.

AndrewC wrote on the 19 Mar 08 at 04:58

I would say the main cause of hardware support regressions is a lack of people testing the releases on their hardware, not short release cycles.

jvin248 wrote on the 4 Jul 08 at 12:20

One of the greatest strengths of the 6 month cycle is that it forces everyone working on it into two smaller stressful steps instead of one large stressful period.

Compare that with Microsoft... they are on a five to seven year cycle and so have a really stressful launch! And also have to forecast much further into the future for what hardware might be available in seven years! That's one of the reasons Vista got in so much trouble (and why Apple is surging and Linux is greatly helped by people having a reason to experiment with new things).

It also creates twice the "buzz".

I generally upgrade once per year, but I may be migrating to one LTS (8.04) installation for regular tasks like email etc on an older pc and then doing more frequent upgrades on a newer test/play box. If I create Virtual Machines with VirtualBox I may combine both of these aspects into a single hardware box. The thing about Ubuntu is it allows experimenting with each scenario, whim, or desire in upgrading frequency.

Post your comment