3 ms·
LTS releases are supposed to do this. The six-month releases can be considered, for all intents and purposes related to stability, "testing" releases. The LTS r
by Kerrick 14y ago
LTS releases are supposed to do this. The six-month releases can be considered, for all intents and purposes related to stability, "testing" releases. The LTS releases are supposed to be stable enough for large-scale rollouts, with three years of desktop and five years of server support. In fact, Canonical upped the ante with 12.04--five years for both the desktop and server versions. Of course, plenty of things are supposed to be.
- saurik 14y agoIf that were the case, then one would not expect any serious changes to be made in the actual final release from the one that precedes it, as the changes being tested by the six-month period get locked in as "this definitly worked". As that is obviously not the case, either the release process is flawed or your premise is incorrect. In fact, it seems more like the cycle is simply "don't make us support forever every single release", not "let's take a year and a half to test these changes before committing to them (which, to be clear, I'm fine with, although in practice it has meant that I always upgrade away from LTS anyway as it is often less stable, in a "will it lock up on me" sense, than the subsequent releases).
- teilo 14y agoLTS means one thing, and one thing only: That they will release security fixes for it for five years. It has nothing to do with stability and testing.