2 ms·
> Rather than "stable long term release," I would phrase it as a "dot release frozen in time as much as possible given serious bugs and security fixes." Which
by cesarb 6y ago
> Rather than "stable long term release," I would phrase it as a "dot release frozen in time as much as possible given serious bugs and security fixes."
Which is exactly what we want.
> So, yes, it is different but, increasingly, most of the software you use will be using this type of model. Certainly SaaSs don't let you choose a dot release for the most part.
Not all of us are happy with having to follow the update treadmill. Software is a tool, like an electric drill; one doesn't update their electric drill every day, otherwise we would be wasting all our time updating and dealing with the fallout of updates, instead of drilling holes in wood. If you develop (or do anything) on top of software, you want a stable base, instead of one shifting all the time; one builds castles in rock, not in quicksand.
- ghaff 6y agoAbsolutely fair that you desire that, but it's not where the software world in general is headed and it's at least understandable that software companies are skating to where the puck is headed. (ADDED: Of course, with open source, you have no requirement to upgrade. It's just that folks want to make certain upgrades--like security fixes--and for serious bugs but no others.) The nice thing about open source--rather than cloud SaaSs--is that there are more backward-looking options from a variety of sources. I'd also encourage users who need or feel they need that sort of option to contribute to such efforts so that they're sustainable.