Comment 38 for bug 653619
Revision history for this message
| Milan Niznansky (online-minosi-deactivatedaccount) wrote | #38 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
0e1f616
(Get the code!)
@HelderPereira
Had one not voiced his opinion, shall he not have a voice in the matter.
@Krzysztof Klimonda
Well all here, while complaining ravishingly sometimes, very much appreciate the community effort going into Ubuntu.
What you have highlighted though, is the core of the issue: Backports are a community project with no real Canonical backing.
That is the problem. LTS without a real backporting effort is meaningless. And it is Canonical's job to make it happen.
I am not talking about back-porting every single app out there. Not by a long shot. But there are a _few_ mission-critical apps like Evolution or say Firefox that become useless unless regular functionality/
Debian does the heavy lifting to make it happen so there is no excuse for a commercial distro based on it not doing likewise.
Please do not take my postings as ranting. It saddening me that after 6 years on the market Canonical still does not get the point. Supportability and compatibility is key. And that is not possible without backport support for critical apps.
Bling stuff like Unity,Compiz, or the next great thing, is NOT a requirement for Linux distro to succeed in the volume/business/OEM market. Good app support is. And good app support in practice equals a major backporting effort.
/me throwing in the towel