Author: Alan Pope Date: To: Hampshire LUG Discussion List Subject: Re: [Hampshire] For those considering upgrading to Ubuntu Feisty
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 12:50:47PM +0100, Paul Tansom wrote: > ** Alan Pope <alan@???> [2007-04-18 12:21]:
> > On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 12:14:36PM +0100, Paul Tansom wrote:
> > >
> > > 1. I'm assuming Feisty is an LTS release
> >
> > Why?
> > It isn't.
>
> Because it is a major version number upgrade.
There is no such thing as a "major version number upgrade" in ubuntu. You
upgrade from one release to the next if you want to, or stay where you are,
or skip releases by installing fresh.
The only addition is the LTS release which is intended to allow people who
require a stable (as in unchanging) platform to be deployed and guarantee
support for 5 years on the server, 3 years on the desktop/laptop. Non-LTS
releases are supported for 18 months.
But "supported" I am saying that those releases get security updates/bug
fixes for that duration of time. For example, Breezy Badger (5.10) has just
expired this month - it was released in October 2005, 18 months later is
April 2007.
> One of the touted
> advantages of Ubuntu is that it is more up to date than pure Debian.
It is. Although right now with Etch (Debian 4.0) and Feisty (Ubuntu 7.04)
coming out so close, there isn't much to call. However in 6 months when
Gutsy releases Ubuntu will be "ahead" again. If Etch+1 doesn't release by
April 2008 then of course Ubuntu will take another leap in a years time.
Again contributing to that oft touted advantage.
> I
> consider the LTS versions to be equivalent (in intended usage at least)
> of Debian Stable, so if the LTS releases don't keep up with the major
> versions then this advantage has gone.
>
Ubuntus goal isn't simply to overtake Debian with every release, it's just a
byproduct of the fast release cycle that Ubuntu has. LTS is designed to be
stable and with a 3 year support window on the desktop it is *still* (going
by past experience) going to (probably) release another LTS in around the
same time frame as between two stable releases of Debian.
If we assume that Gutsy+1 (April 2008) is to be the next Ubuntu LTS then
that makes:-
Dapper - June 2006 to Gutsy+1 (assumed) April 2008 = ~2 years.
Sarge - June 2005 to Etch April 2007 = ~2 years.
Whilst you could argue that Ubuntu loses *one* advantage over Debian there,
that is only one factor in the decision making process about which distro to
take.
Someone wanting support for wierd ecoteric platforms might choose Debian
over Ubuntu. A user wanting commerical support from the sponsor of the
distro might choose Ubuntu.
Choices choices.
> Any idea when the next LTS release is due? I've not managed to find that
> information in the FAQ or by searching on the site (for things like
> roadmap, release date, etc.).
>
I did explain this in my last mail.
> Maybe my view of what should be happening doesn't match with what is
> happening. I see LTS as the server side package and the rest as the
> desktop (much like I see stable for the server side and testing for the
> desktop - although with a short pause just after a new stable release to
> let testing settle again!). Ubuntu actually specifies server ISO images,
> so whereas I wouldn't use testing on a server, and therefore wouldn't
> use a non-LTS release on a server, that may not be the Ubuntu view.
>
The server images are only there to allow you to easily install on
server-grade equipment, using technologies such as LVM and RAID easily. They
also provide kernels optimised for servers and dont contain a graphical user
interface.
