Re: Is oldstable security support duration something to be proud of?
Marc Haber <email@example.com>:
> This is a remarkable way to make the blatant failure to release Sarge
> in a timely manner an advantage from a different poit of view.
> If we really manage to release stable every 18 months, that would make
> the normal support cycle for any stable release 30 months. Which is
> not bad, but will drive corporate users who are used to updates being
> as painful as a reinstall away from us and towards Ubuntu LTS (if they
Painful as a reinstall, yes. So much so that they're often *very*
unwilling to upgrade anything! Sec. patches yes, but upgrade? Hell
no! That would break fifteen other things they rely on.
Real corps don't even consider Ubuntu. They're Redhat for the support
agreements. Minimizes lawyer fees.
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*) http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html Linux Counter #80292
- - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html Please, don't Cc: me.