Ubuntu considers switch to a rolling release model between LTS editions


Recommended Posts

Ubuntu considers ?huge? change that would end traditional release cycle

Ubuntu 12.10 (thus named because it came out in October 2012) has just arrived, and 13.04 and 13.10 will come in April and October of 2013. But 14.04 in April 2014 could be the last version released after just a six-month development period. 14.04 is also the next "Long Term Support" or LTS edition. Every two years, Ubuntu is sort of frozen in place with a more stable edition that is guaranteed support for five years. If the change Canonical is considering is adopted, every future edition starting with 14.04 will be an LTS, so the next version after 14.04 would be 16.04 in April 2016.

Why bother? Canonical kernel team manager Leann Ogasawara explained in a Google hangout today that this proposal is on the table because Canonical thinks it can deliver both stability and cutting-edge features with rolling releases. For the two years between LTS releases, there would be no new versions but there would be lots of updates.

Read more

Why bother? Canonical kernel team manager Leann Ogasawara explained in a Google hangout today that this proposal is on the table because Canonical thinks it can deliver both stability and cutting-edge features with rolling releases.

Oh cahoot, does that mean thorough testing and coding of any changes they make before actually implementing them and forcing them on users, if so; microsoft, arch linux team, nokia, et al. please take note.

This could be a good idea, the 6 month release cycle has become pretty outdated IMO. The non-lts releases have always been glorified betas, so they might as well just go rolling release between the LTS releases. I really like the sound of this.

Could it ever truly be rolling if debian is not rolling?

Debian has (or at least had last time I messed with it) a rolling branch, unstable (Sid).

http://wiki.debian.org/DebianUnstable#Introduction

Several distros like Bodhi Linux do a semi-rolling release where they update the software but only update the system when they get system updates from Ubuntu. They are based on 12.04.1 currently. I would be happy with something like that, with only security updates coming down the line.

Several distros like Bodhi Linux do a semi-rolling release where they update the software but only update the system when they get system updates from Ubuntu.

Yea Chakra's doing this too (via Arch).. the core system is released in 'stages' or however you want to word it, the applications themselves (stuff that won't kersplode your system) is rolling. Actually a pretty good setup I think.. system's stable yet you're constantly up to date with the "regular" software.. in theory the worst that'll happen is the one application will crash, no more "holy god what did I do" moments with an update. Arch had a few major doozies if you weren't paying attention to their news feeds and what the updater is doing.

My apologies, I thought unstable was not rolling.

You are actually correct. Sid is not rolling. It is never technically put into freeze like Testing before release, but since Unstable's main purpose is to act as a staging area for Testing, it is effectively frozen at the same time as Testing. Unstable may have slightly newer versions of some packages during a freeze, or even packages that were removed from Testing because they were deemed too unstable or buggy for release, but no major new software versions are introduced. (For example, GNOME 3.4 is in both Sid and Wheezy even though GNOME 3.6 is considered stable upstream.) Once Wheezy is released, Sid will be forked to become the basis for Jesse, then it will effectively be unfrozen.

There are actually several proposals to create a truly rolling branch of Debian that are often brought up around release time. The consensus, at the moment at least, seems to be that creating a rolling release would distract developers from fixing release-critical bugs - thus preventing Testing from being released in a timely manner - and generally reduce the quality of Debian as a whole.

Canonical might be able to pull off a rolling release of Ubuntu with some software that they maintain internally, such as Unity or the Linux kernel, but they don't have the resources to independently maintain every package in the Debian archive. I think that their "rolling release" will focus mainly on a few key packages that Canonical themselves maintain, and the remainder will be maintained by regular imports from Sid. Effectively, Ubuntu's rolling release will semi-freeze the same way Sid does, though possibly to a lesser extent, when Debian freezes Testing. The only practical way around that limitation would be for Debian to create a true rolling-release branch, which isn't likely to happen, or Canonical to re-base on another distribution, which is even less likely to happen.

Debian in my opinion has a slighty different Market to Ubuntu, "rolling release" and "stable" does not always go well hand in hand.

I completely agree. I'm definitely against Debian adding a rolling-release repository. Fortunately, it seems that the vast majority of Debian Developers agree with me.

Canonical, on the other hand, might be able to pull it off. My last post might have made it sound a little like I'm against Ubuntu becoming a rolling distribution: I'm not. I merely pointed out some of the challenges they will face making that happen. That said, I'm sure they've thought it through.

I've seen some nods from the Fedora camp that they may move into rolling releases, or at least offer both stable releases and a rolling release. They currently have something like that (rawhide) but it's not an official rolling release.

Based on my experience with Arch on a pogoplug, rolling releases need to be improved a bit but there is a lot of promise there as long as they roll smoother than a square tire.

And I'd greatly like a more frequently updated DE.

Now I based my information on distrowatch and I understand the time between today and the rolling release but it is my opinion that the stability / cutting edge mixture they have currently adopted (and usability) is what brought Ubuntu to the fore-front of popularity.

The Ubuntu distro losing popularity and I am sure many have opinions why - changing the release strategy might not be the move to reverse the path they are on.

Perhaps current adopters might have a fluctuation but the "windows" converts will be further distanced and for those who are looking for a "light" distro may leave.

This is a wild statement but I have always felt that Ubuntu provided the strengths of Linux without the feel and complexity.

This is not to say Ubuntu is limiting - clearly it can be used by hardcore / new comers a like.

To back step a little I missed the fact LTS releases will sexist but I would still expect on some level windows converts will be entangled with this concept of "most recent release" and the expectation of everything being close to perfect.

good idea imho. and in the meantime i just use fuduntu, as it is a rolling release plus combines the best of ubuntu and fedora.

Now I based my information on distrowatch and I understand the time between today and the rolling release but it is my opinion that the stability / cutting edge mixture they have currently adopted (and usability) is what brought Ubuntu to the fore-front of popularity.

The Ubuntu distro losing popularity and I am sure many have opinions why - changing the release strategy might not be the move to reverse the path they are on.

I don't think Ubuntu cares about the desktop anymore. They are more focused on mobile now.

I don't think Ubuntu cares about the desktop anymore. They are more focused on mobile now.

To be fair Ubuntu has been looking to spread itself around in all sorts of already heavily dominated markets.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • You've tried DuckDuckGo and Brave Search, now get serious with SearXNG by Paul Hill Over the last decade, it has become quite trendy to dump Google Search in favor of privacy-preserving alternatives such as DuckDuckGo, Startpage, and Brave Search. These search engines have done a very good job at highlighting dodgy practices by Google, such as adjusting search results based on what it thinks you’ll like (filter bubble) and stalking you around the web to advertise to you. While these search engines are good starting points when compared to non-private services like Google, there are still quite a few issues with them. For example, both DuckDuckGo and Brave Search require running non-free JavaScript in your web browser, which is comparable to running proprietary software on your computer, meaning you can be sure about what it’s actually doing in the background. Another issue is that these search engines are hosted on the respective companies’ servers, and you are using a service that you don’t control. Finally, DuckDuckGo, while offering privacy features, relies heavily on Microsoft’s infrastructure for its results and, in the past, has permitted Microsoft tracking scripts. If you are looking for a more private search solution than DuckDuckGo, Brave Search, and Startpage, then I recommend taking a look at SearXNG. It is a privacy-respecting metasearch engine that can be used via different public instances, which is useful for mobile users, or you can install it on your computer or server and run it locally with maximum control. Unlike Google, Bing, or Brave Search, which crawl the web and have their own search indexes, SearXNG is a metasearch engine, meaning it taps other search engines, stripping your identifying data, such as IP address, user agent, and cookies, in the process. Your search query is sent to the other search engines you enable before aggregating the results. SearXNG has deployment flexibility. If you are a casual user or a mobile user and don’t want to run SearXNG locally, you can use a public instance that is hosted by someone else. The main problem with this is that you are putting trust in the maintainer of the instance regarding stuff like logs that they may keep; good hosts should have a privacy policy explaining their policies. If you are trying to use SearXNG, you can also install the software on your device and then head to 127.0.0.1:8080 in your browser and search from there. While you don’t have to worry about a third-party admin like the public instances, search engines could ultimately block your IP address if they frown on you pulling in their search results locally. If you want to run it locally, it’s a good idea to use proxies or VPNs to hide your actual IP. You don’t have to worry about this with a public instance, as search engines never see your IP address. The main privacy benefit of using SearXNG is that it isolates your identity from the underlying engines that it’s capable of searching, such as Google and Bing. These search engines will only see requests coming from a generic server, so they can’t profile you and create a bubble filter that influences what results you see. This also ensures that your search engine doesn’t turn into an echo chamber that prevents you from reading alternative points of view. As a free software project, you are allowed to inspect SearXNG to make sure there are no negative features bundled inside. This sets it apart from the privacy search engines mentioned earlier because you can’t check their source code. As a meta search engine, you are not restricted to getting results from one source. Due to the fact that it scrapes content from other websites, your SearXNG instance will periodically get blocked from different providers, so it’s good to select a range of sources as a backup. While enabling all of the services will give you great results, this can make searching slower. I am personally happy with slower searches for the best results, but you can always check which providers are slowing down your search from the search results page and disable them to speed things up. If you want decent results quickly, enable the main search providers such as Google, Brave, DuckDuckGo, Qwant, Bing, and Yahoo. This way, you get wide coverage without the latency. On the Engines tab in Preferences, do note that there are different tabs, such as General, Images, and Videos, with their own providers that can be toggled and are not covered by "Enable all" while on the General tab, so be sure to dig into each. Just a note, if you want to enable everything, press "Enable all" in one tab, then hit save at the bottom of the page, then do the next tab, and so on. If you press "Enable all", then do that in each tab, and then save, nothing will stick. When I had just some of the search engines enabled, I searched “define nefarious” and results came back with the definition of “define” - obviously that was a sucky result. However, when I had everything enabled, it found dictionary pages for the word “nefarious” and even had an inline definition on the sidebar, which is quite nice too - that was delivered by WolframAlpha for anyone wondering! Probably the worst thing about this meta search engine is that the engines you select are saved with a cookie, so you must enable them on every new device you use SearXNG on, including if you decide to go into incognito mode with your web browser. Honestly, I would say this is the most annoying aspect, and perhaps if your browser lets you choose a separate private browsing search engine, then it would be best to use DuckDuckGo for this portion of your browsing. Another weakness of SearXNG is the random blocking of it by search providers. When you are on the results page, expand the “Response time” box, and it will show things like “Suspended: too many requests” or “access denied”. This is why it is good to enable several providers so that there is always a fallback to get results from. I won’t pretend SearXNG will be for everyone, however, if you enable all of the providers and put up with the slower response time, the results can be really amazing. Even if you don’t want to use it as your daily driver, keeping a bookmark handy that links to it is a good idea if you ever feel like doing a deep dive into a niche topic where other search engines are just failing to bring up any good result, due to the amount of sources it looks on. If you’re interested in radical user control over the software you use, installing SearXNG locally can also be a good idea, but be prepared to be temporarily blocked from sites if you trigger bot sensors without a VPN. Personally, I’ve opted to use a public instance, rather than install it myself. If you want to use it via a public instance, head over to searx.space to find a provider. Let us know in the comments if you have used SearXNG or its predecessor, Searx. What do you think about the quality of the results?
    • Dear Neowin, If it is not too much trouble, can you start using the new-ish designations for Insider Preview? "Experimental" is different than "former Dev" as it can apply to different models, eg 26H1 or 26H2 etc, right? No need to seed confusion IMHO. And, please "finally" update your graphics. OK?
    • Did you see their FAQ, its quite good. Have a look in the Advanced section. https://delta.chat/en/help
    • Just install Linux Mint that is a real blessing and many times cheaper because you can continue using your old Windows computer/laptop with the latest Linux updates.
    • Interesting share -- however it does not make sense: Email messages get stored somewhere, so how is Delta Chat "based on email" and decentralized without actually storing anything? By Web3 standard practices, the various Relays would require dedicated storage to make messages available to the recipients (like a large series of message queue channels, akin to racks of traditional post office boxes)... and Contacts must be two-way confirmed in order for encryption keys to be exchanged (ostensibly every key-pair is uniquely bound between sender and recipient) and the Relays would preserve the public keys in order to facilitate message carriage... or every device stores all sorts of keys and contact info. All of this to say, decentralized messaging is like running Bluesky nodes except instead of discovering/browsing public feeds by various posters (at the given node) these Delta Chats would be relaying encrypted messages (via Relays) that only trusted recipients would have the appropriate decryption key (their own private key) to read it. But this doesn't solve the "it's like email" sales pitch. The only way it's like email is that there's encrypted binary stuff being transported from your app into the federated ether of Delta Chat Relays for others to decrypt (hopefully only the intended recipient)... but outside of this federated relays framework, it is absolutely nothing like email.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      tuben earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      226
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      158
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!