"Let's Discuss Interim Releases (and a Rolling Release)"

[Orbmiser]

Official Ubuntu Rolling Release Proposal
http://www.webupd8.org/2013/02/official-ubuntu-rolling-release-proposal.html

Ubuntu To Discuss Move to Rolling Release At Next Weeks UDS
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2013/02/ubuntu-to-discuss-rolling-release-move-at-next-weeks-uds
.

[viking777]

Interesting results in the poll on the second site - at the time I read it 85% voted in favour and only 7% voted against (the rest don't know). Personally I added my vote in favour of the change. I would love to see a rolling Ubuntu and hopefully a rolling Mint to go with it. Having said that I hoover up every update available to both Mint and Ubuntu as soon as they become available and I never suffer from breakages. Otoh, if you read the forums regularly as I do, it seems there is a certain percentage of the user base for whom even starting up Synaptic causes their machine to self destruct. I guess they will either have to take disk images as I keep banging on about (to no avail usually) or stick with LTS. Rolling releases can be more unstable than point releases, but more unstable than the present situation (ie. not unstable at all) is a risk I would have no hesitation in taking.

[monkeyboy]

It is not the release model that matters as much as the quality of what gets released that counts for me. However I do admire the Ubuntu folks for their willingness to consider change, I wish them luck.

[craig10x]

I have been running Ubuntu 13.04 testing (installed) for over a month now and have to say that the updating has gone VERY smoothly...only had one minor breakage in the vlc player (no sound) which they had FIXED within about 3 days...

So i would say the quality control on the "rolling updates" in 13.04 has been quite excellent, and no doubt would improve even more with them not being under the 6 month development timetable "gun" as it were...

I definitely would LOVE to see them go ahead with this!

You would have a choice of LTS to LTS or the Rolling Version (and rolling could be set to either daily or monthly updates...your choice)...
Will be interesting to see also what ubuntu based distros such as mint, zorin, pinguy, elementary, etc...do as far as whether they will go with rolling or LTS to LTS...

Personally (on my ubuntu install) i will go for the "rolling" version myself...quite happily

[Jose Manuel]

Dear: The idea of ​​making Ubuntu in Rolling Release is over the table for discussion. Now, the Canonical director of engineering (Rick Spencer) ensures that Ubuntu convert a distribution model of continuous development is an idea that could benefit both users and developers and the community in general, grounds that it is a necessary step if you really want that convergence between phones, tablets and computers a reality.

Rick Spencer's idea is to abandon the "smaller" versions and in their place offer users three alternatives:

1) Ubuntu LTS.-

2) Ubuntu rolling release with daily updates.-

3) Ubuntu rolling release with monthly updates.-

Actually, some ideas seem quite accurate, for fans looking for always have the latest release a rolling release with updates daily or monthly, and for those who seek high stability make the usual LTS releases every two years. I am inclined towards the latter, I value stability, I would still see the usual releases LTS versions every two years.-

Incidentally, I downloaded and testing version of Kubuntu 13.04 Alpha 2 with KDE 4.10. It works superbly well, and that it is an Alpha version, but has great stability and speed. By the way: We will have to see what he does about Linux Mint about it ?? (hopefully continue taking LTS releases every two years).- Best Regards.-

[Orbmiser]

I would imagine Clem & Team would mimic whatever Ubuntu decided to do.

I would like to see ability to tigger any of those options on the fly switching from daily to monthly I think would be advantages if having problems with daily. Then swap to monthly if so inclined. By having alternate repo list already made and click to change kind of thing.

I don't mind rolling since I always mirror my partitions once every couple of weeks or so. So rolling would be ok for me.
And not to have to clean install for new versions means less work and redo for me.
.

[craig10x]

From the way it is described, i would imagine it would be just one rolling distro, but very likely, you would be able to adjust the software updater to either run daily or monthly, depending on preference...that would be the simplest way for them to set it up...

On the Linux Mint side, i'd imagine Clem could easily make the necessary adjustment to the mint updater to work in synch with those choices (assuming he would put mint on rolling rather then the LTS to LTS alternative)...

[xenopeek]

An interesting proposal, I hope they can make this work. The Ubuntu OnAir discussion was worth the time to watch it.

So they propose a LTS release will be done every two years, with users either staying on the LTS or following the rolling release. Monthly a snapshot will be made of the rolling release, so users that want the rolling release can install that. It will be replaced by next month's snapshot. The monthly snapshot won't be tested separately, it's just a snapshot of the rolling release from that day. Except for the LTS and critical packages in the rolling release, testing will be done automatically only.

Downstream distros, such as Linux Mint, can do what they want but it wouldn't make much sense to do a 6 month release cycle as there is nothing at the 6 month mark from Ubuntu to sync to. Well, except for the monthly snapshot but that is only supported from Ubuntu till the next month. Seems like if this goes ahead, Linux Mint might want to follow upstream and thus also do a monthly snapshot.

Currently application developers have two months before an Ubuntu release in which they can make sure their application works with the library versions as included with that Ubuntu release. Switching to a daily rolling release means there will be a very short window for developers to do that. Though it seems that Qt+QML is what Ubuntu prefers application developers use, because Ubuntu can control when changes to Qt+QML happen (I didn't get why that is though) and so they can give a heads-up earlier to application developers about upcoming changes. Unity will shift from Gtk to Qt also I think. So more distance from GNOME?

Ubuntu will converge to one operating system for desktops, tablets, phones and TVs. There is some challenge there as for tablets, phones and TVs Ubuntu will have to work with OEMs, and those generally want a fixed release, while Ubuntu wants to avoid the fragmentation hell of Android (where generally your tablet and phone are stuck on old versions of Android, having Android application developers have to support an insane amount of releases; Ubuntu wants developers to just have to support the LTS and/or the rolling release [i.e., today]).

Xorg upgrades will probably be held back, because binary graphics card drivers are apparently always lagging and won't work with the latest Xorg. So Xorg won't be upgraded till a fair number of binary drivers support the new Xorg version. There might be more such challenges with binary drivers?

The rolling release will likely import from Debian Sid, to avoid delays in getting bugfixes. Ubuntu will do some form of automatic testing on this to avoid breakage. To me that looks like duplication of effort and it sounds like they might eventually just skip Debian? Though I read somewhere 75% of the packages on Ubuntu are packaged by Debian developers. Anyway, though a rolling release it looks like it won't be nearly as up to date as for example Arch Linux is.

[Orbmiser]

Currently application developers have two months before an Ubuntu release in which they can make sure their application works with the library versions as included with that Ubuntu release. Switching to a daily rolling release means there will be a very short window for developers to do that.

That would have me concerned as 3rd party developers are many times behind already waiting on Ubuntu many times to incorporate into repo's. Also wonder what good is a monthly then? As many times I have to go to 3rd party sources to get the latest. As ubuntu is pretty stale on including 3rd party apps up to date versions. And wonder if that would change under the rolling release model?
.

[KBD47]

My guess is that, discussion aside, this is a done deal. Ubuntu with its now 'universal' operating system: phones, tablets, TVs and PC's, just about must go rolling at this point as the old update system will no longer work for them. Mint will need to decide whether to follow this path or not. I would like to see Mint keep a fairly stationary 2 year LTS at the least, and a separate rolling version for adventurous souls. Also would like to see more focus on LMDE.

[Orbmiser]

"My guess is that, discussion aside, this is a done deal."

I intend to agree as Shuttleworth has his vision.
And that is looking away from desktop to encompassing a more generic all devices Interface platform.
And seems rolling release is the only way to achieve this for consumer devices use vs. desktop use.
.

[craig10x]

Currently application developers have two months before an Ubuntu release in which they can make sure their application works with the library versions as included with that Ubuntu release. Switching to a daily rolling release means there will be a very short window for developers to do that.

That would have me concerned as 3rd party developers are many times behind already waiting on Ubuntu many times to incorporate into repo's. Also wonder what good is a monthly then? As many times I have to go to 3rd party sources to get the latest. As ubuntu is pretty stale on including 3rd party apps up to date versions. And wonder if that would change under the rolling release model?
.

Yes it would, applications should be very current...in 13.04 testing, for example, i have gotten newest versions of pidgin, vlc media player and sabnzbd (which i use to download nzbs) all 3rd party apps...i am sure the rolling release would work in the same identical fashion...

[Skara Brae]

Before Canonical came up with Unity (and before I switched to Mint), I have always had LTS releases of Ubuntu.

I didn't and don't see the point of installing/upgrading to a new version (every 6 months?!). I "just" surf the Net, edit pictures, do some simple office work, and other daily stuff: I really don't need every new edition of Ubuntu (or Mint, or Windows for that matter).

As an example: in Windows (Vista), I still have OpenOffice 3.4 : it works fine, and I see no reason to switch to LibreOffice.

I hope I won't have to upgrade to Mint 15 too soon. Maya worked fine, why upgrading to 15, 16, 17...? But I admit that I have always been quite "conservative", when it comes to changes.

[Orbmiser]

Good points on LTS stable but for many their setup is never optimal. May be a sleep/hibernate issue or wifi and graphics issue.
As lack of fine tuned drivers for linux seems always a need for improvement in the basics like sound,video,etc.. issues.

Then there are performance improvements and the plugging of memory leaks.
And such that makes for a swifter & snappier desktop experience.

Most notable for me going from KDE Mint 14 using 4.9.5 to 4.10 is a noticeable improvement to desktop use and better experience.
A fact I would not be aware of if not keeping up with the ever changing linux upgrades.

But yep nothing wrong if a LTS is giving you the optimal stable experience and fitting your needs and performing well.
Then see no compelling reason to switch. And that is the vague word there "Compelling" or motivated to personal needs that an LTS may not suffice.
.

[Orbmiser]

Then there is retail and business considerations using rolling releases.

LTS Should Die | System76 Position on the Ubuntu LTS and Rolling Release Proposal
http://carlrichell.com/post/44549453930/lts-should-die

[Jose Manuel]

I'm not at all agree which LTS versions must die. I really think this guy has neither idea what it says. LTS versions of Linux Mint and Ubuntu, Kubuntu, etc., etc., are by far the most stable, the best are always running. I'm not at all agree with what he says.-

What I would have to change is, if not adopted the rolling release model, at least reduce the number of versions, one version each year get nothing else, not a version every six months as at present. For Linux Mint could take a one year a version of its branch based on Ubuntu, and become a true Rolling Release Linux Mint Debian Edition for those who want to have the latest of the latest. For those who want stability, no how LTS versions. I hope you do not discontinue .... Best Regards.-

[craig10x]

Actually, Mark shuttleworth just had a new blog response to the rolling release discussion the developers had...

The way he really wants to go is not rolling release, but frequent updated versions of ubuntu (say every 2 months or so) and have various "channels" like Google Chrome browser has, so when that version hits stable, you can then change to it in the updates....that should actually be BETTER and even more stable then a rolling release, and you would have all the latest software, etc...and would not have to keep re-installing to keep pretty current...

[robert3242]

I found this article this evening. It concerns the conversations taking place within the Ubuntu developers' community concerning the possibility of moving toward a rolling release model, while retaining LTS releases: http://www.zdnet.com/ubuntu-linux-developer-squabbles-go-public-7000012295/

[catweazel]

Been there. Done that. This was discussed weeks ago.

[DMGrier]

Ubuntu is talking about going rolling release, how will this effect Mint if they go to a rolling release model.