Comments on: SUSE is Slowing Down

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 19:52:02 +0000

That’s debatable. You could argue that 2 annual releases were “fixed”. I was a SuSE user for quite a few years back then.

By: Chris

Chris — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 18:06:23 +0000

Ok, “bi-annual” might be right, with the exception of 2007.

Still it’s far from a fixed 6 month release cycle which you seem to claim with:

The real news here is not a “fixed” release cycle. The real news is that OpenSUSE will be re-released (version bump) once in 8 months rather than just 6.

And now please tell me that “bi-annual” = “fixed 6 months” …

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:46:24 +0000

This shows SUSE release intervals increasing after the Novell/Microsoft affairs. it used to be a bi-annual thing.

By: Chris

Chris — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:41:49 +0000

Sure, cause you numpty weren’t able to find your own ass even with a map …

As usual you are talking out of your arse (and surely will say that you didn’t have time to verify your claims cause you had to pursue some other stuff / aka spread some more FUD & libel / make false claims). But hey, don’t shoot the messanger …

So please feel free to point out the fixed 6 months release cycle openSUSE / SuSE has been following from 2003 till now:

11.1: 2008-12-11
11.0: 2008-06-19
10.3: 2007-10-04
10.2: 2006-12-07
10.1: 2006-05-11
10.0: 2005-10-06
9.3: 2005-03-10
9.2: 2004-10-06
9.1: 2004-03-18
9.0: 2003-10-18
8.2: 2003-03-12

Then I got bored …

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 16:01:56 +0000

Anonymous, Looking further back, I am not sure this is true.

By: David Gerard

David Gerard — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 15:56:26 +0000

No, I don’t think it was a binary drivers issue.

Yes – the point is that this stuff isn’t easy even with good underpinnings. Ubuntu needs to somehow make this aspect as well work as well as Debian without Debian’s looooong release cycles.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 15:55:00 +0000

Of all recent release cycles the last for 11.1 with 6 months has been the shortest one, the ones before were 8 to 10 months. So it’s rather back to old traditions.

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 15:41:46 +0000

Let’s not forget SP3 of Windows XP, which rendered some H-P machines unbootable. Vista had more such errors (caused by insufficient testing).

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 15:39:42 +0000

Wasn’t the Ubuntu incident related to binary graphics drivers? I remember it vaguely from 2 years ago.

Also, Mac OS X had similar issues, leaving some of its users stranded in the command line.

By: David Gerard

David Gerard — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 15:35:26 +0000

Horrifying update bugs happen. e.g. in Ubuntu – remember the one that disabled X a few years ago?

The cause of upgrades failing like this is a lack of testing. Note how Debian dist-upgrades are legendarily flawless, but Ubuntu ones fail more often than not (IME).