Why has Ubuntu committed to a 6-month release cycle? Why should it have a fixed cycle at all?
Doesn't that go against the "if it ain't broken don't fix it" saying?
Software Engineering Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professionals, academics, and students working within the systems development life cycle. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
Ubuntu releases are challenging because they represent an aggregation of the work of thousands of independent software projects. We feel that a time-based release process enables us to provide our users with the best balance of the latest software, tight integration, and excellent overall quality.
I agree personally that frequent releases is the best way to get software out to users. The problem is that to make a good release you need to do thorough testing which takes time and effort. The 6 months cycle is the compromise Ubuntu chose.
Every time you install a new version, things break. I am running 10.04 LTS. I assume that anything that apt-get upgrades will not break my code. If I upgraded to 10.09 libraries move, directories change, things will break, and for what? Latest features? No thanks. LTS is good for servers which need stability more than anything else.
I expect 12.04 to be LTS.