We need a serious evlauation of the LMDE "rolling release".

[sobrus]

I think ISO images are obsolete and should not be maintained at all.
Small bootable network installer (just like the one opensuse has got) would be just fine. With selection which DE flavour you would like to download and install.
If you have slow internet connection, or just dont want to wait, why are you installing rolling distro anyway? It's plain wrong idea. Go with Mint LTS.

As for release cycle/model: I think that every additional layer over debian repositories is BAD idea. Update Pack idea is good in theory, because neither testing or sid is meant to be 100% stable.
It is already flawed in some ways, though. (probably due to lack of manpower).
But this model can be, and most problable it will be, improved. And will be really good.

But any other ideas how LMDE should be released, schedules, stable releases, beta, RC, etc makes things only worse.
I even have doubts about my "important fixes idea" - because it makes LMDE a bit more alike traditional distro, and would permit update packs to be released every 6 months - and this is NOT good.
This is just solution for a problem that should not exists.
If someone wants OS updated every 6 months - he can install Mint Main/Ubuntu/whatever. They are better suited for this release model, so why bother with LMDE?

It would be much better to just have more frequent updates (once a month? a week?) instead of thinking about complicated solutions, and solutions for solutions.
Any additional idea requires additional manpower, instead of relying on debian maintainers and testers who are already doing great work.
Not to mention LMDE will be losing more and more compatibility with Debian. It is already less than 100% compatible due to testing being always a bit fresher than UP.

That said, I've been very pleased with LMDE so far. UP5 was a bit flawed due to packages disappearing from debian (flgrx, compiz) - but in overall its 8.5/10 score from me, and UP6 will be released quicker and should be better.
I'm looking forward to install it,

[odo5435]

It would be much better to just have more frequent updates (once a month? a week?) instead of thinking about complicated solutions, and solutions for solutions.

I agree. I can appreciate that there is probably a lack of manpower to achieve this goal. But somehow, I get the feeling that delaying the release of UPs leads to more problems/conflicts arising within the release. This, in turn, delays the release even further which causes more problems/conflict to arise, which... well, I think you get the idea.

Of course, I've no way of knowing whether my suspicions are anywhere near the fact. However, if such a situation is occurring it not only leads to excessively large downloading of files every new release but also to the rushing out of incomplete or poorly tested Update Packs just to assuage demands for another release.

[zerozero]

It would be much better to just have more frequent updates (once a month? a week?) instead of thinking about complicated solutions, and solutions for solutions.

I agree. I can appreciate that there is probably a lack of manpower to achieve this goal. But somehow, I get the feeling that delaying the release of UPs leads to more problems/conflicts arising within the release. This, in turn, delays the release even further which causes more problems/conflict to arise, which... well, I think you get the idea.

Of course, I've no way of knowing whether my suspicions are anywhere near the fact. However, if such a situation is occurring it not only leads to excessively large downloading of files every new release but also to the rushing out of incomplete or poorly tested Update Packs just to assuage demands for another release.

it doesn't work exactly like that.
let's pick one example (that is symptomatic and somehow traumatic to the UP history): the transition from UP3 to UP4 (until then there were no major complains, the UP were released in time)
- exactly when was about to make one month over UP3 (thus making UP4 somehow due to release) the xorg/mesa stack was broken in testing (this means that if we were to release UP4 due to calendar constraints all the nvidia and ati users would have major problems with that upgrade completely unacceptable
- that breakage lasted over one month and when debian finally updated xorg solving that issue, gnome3 and gnome-shell entered testing: gnome3.0 at the time and this was also unacceptable to Clem.
for the ones that used this first release of gnome-shell (me included) isn't hard to understand this decision: GS3.0 was dry, hard to customize, very very rough around the edges.
Clem already had at the time MGSE (released with mint12 lisa) but it required GS3.2 and it wouldn't work in 3.0
- so once again (to preserve users experience) UP4 was delayed until gnome3.2 was available in testing and by that time MGSE was already history and cinnamon was made available.

regarding the testing of UP:
- way before an UP is made official and released, Clem makes it available through incoming for community testing (one of the links in my sig is "incoming repos howto";
community testing is a crucial part here but unfortunately (with beautiful exceptions ) the testers are less and less and the reports less helpful and accurate from one UP to another (hey if you can't even read a warning in red saying what changes you have to do in your sources.list what are you going to test and report??)

[jjaythomas]

Thank You ZZero 1st time seen explained simply

t doesn't work exactly like that.

...(not whole quote )

I was all ways like "why Xfce waiting because of Gnome stuff?" Now that explained I see the point)

J.Jay

[sobrus]

hmm...this makes perfect sense (unfortunately ).
If debian testing repo is so "unreliable", I vote to leave update packs system as it is, with faster bugfixes if it is possible.

[Monsta]

hmm...this makes perfect sense (unfortunately ).
If debian testing repo is so "unreliable", I vote to leave update packs system as it is, with faster bugfixes if it is possible.

User proposes, Testing disposes...

It'd be hard to both satisfy those who ask for monthly releases and to keep update packs as bug-free as possible. Your idea about bugfixes is probably the best that can be done. Too bad the discussion is not very active in that thread.

[sobrus]

Yes, it seems like my thread is dead, but I bet Clem read it already.
And even if the idea would not be adopted in any way, I'm pretty sure lmde team is already thinking about improving UP system.

[ringo32]

im sure when mint made a Testing package for testers they can update the system everyweek, and a bigger update every month....There would always be bugs so far i know 100procent bugfree isnt every distro like ubuntu and you use ppa repository there could be such as bugs too... but its important that the Linux core packages Hardware drivers/video and the DE is well tested.... when your system freezing of that , that isnt good but just programms it is not on that high level personnally.. and affect less the stability and you could send it as bug and after that they repair it..... when a os will be maintained then will a os much as bugfree.. but like this by everyupdate your LMDE could break who knows, you get a huge update; from update4 to up5 is 1.1 gb huge as your up4 aso... too much data and it not always good you dont have not the control... you will be has a much different system then before... updates of linux core is not the question but on linux core you you can have standard a Standard LTS core and who want the newest or new as possible

[telenux]

They don't want a serious evaluation. The LMDE / Mint team only want praise and not constructive evaluation.

[killer de bug]

Serious evaluation ? Are you kidding me ? Ringo's posts are just unreadable... He is using google trad and there is no punctuation, and that doesn't mean anything...

And you, you are just criticizing everything without reflexion. As I said earlier, LMDE is for advanced users. It's very flexible and powerful but you should expect some rough edges. You want to have upgrade more often ? Then point to the Debian testing repos. You want something more stable (than stable) point to Debian stable...

The UP are just wonderful for users. They offer a semi rolling release distro with a lot of stability. And you don't spent that much time to upgrade your system compare to a Arch distro or a Debian Testing... That's just perfect.
The Mint team has done a so great job with LMDE. The main Mint is one of the most loved Gnu/Linux distro, and Cinnamon/Nemo is becoming so great... Thanks the team instead of anoying us with wrong consideration. You don't like UP ? You have Testing and Sid. You want a true rolling release ? Arch or...

[zerozero]

killer please don't feed the trolls.
and in this note (also because all was said in this subject) guess it's time to close the topic.