4 ms·

Therein lies the problem - to fix is to change.

• thaumaturgy 11y ago
  Ehh... yes, but to change is not necessarily to fix, and that is the sort of change I was talking about. And there are a lot of changes that can be made without disrupting users. I haven't heard anybody yet say they don't want minor security updates to be installed automatically, so long as they don't go around breaking something else or reorganizing the UI or doing some other dumb thing.
  • digi_owl 11y ago
    And this echos the Torvalds stance of not breaking userspace. That has had the side effect of major changes taking years to get hashed out to make sure the APIs are rock solid. Because once they are in the main tree, they will not be broken. Heck, such attitudes may well be why Windows conquered the corporate desktop while OSX gets nowhere near it (outside of special cases). When MS makes a release, they state how long they will support it for. With OSX there is no such commitment. Or one can see the difference in Linux distros in how RH is commited to maintaining a certain major release for years, while on the other hand you have rolling distros that come with a caveat emptor style warning. And what we see is that developers flock to the rolling ones, while corporations etc embrace the LTS ones.