Maybe true, but as a web developer I can't in good conscience install an OS for a user that won't upgrade to FF4 for more than 6 months. That's the PPA/milestone release system's blessing and curse: easy to install software, hard to get the latest version without terminal witchcraft or upgrading the entire distro and eating whatever other changes (Unity) that upgrade brings.
Seems perfectly reasonable, and more importantly, prudent given the LTS nature.
To summarize:
* FF4 is available in a PPA right now - ppa:mozillateam/firefox-stable
* 10.04 will continue use FF3.6 in main as long as Mozilla supports it (probably about 6 more months)
* Once mozilla stops support for 3.6, 10.04 will switch to the latest stable (if that is FF5, that is what gets installed).
Seems very reasonable. Imagine if you are a huge corporation and you standardized on Ubuntu 10.04. Would you want every package to get updated to the latest and greatest each time it comes out or would you want security updates to those packages? If you want latest and greatest, jump on the 6 month cycle. If you want to get security updates for a known system, stick to the LTS. Even so, for those that WANT to get the latest of select packages, there are ways.
So, if you feel that having the latest and greatest for your users is important, stick to the non-LTS cycle and pick it and go. You can also install 10.10.
Have a look at the EOL dates...you can use 10.10 with full support until April 2012, getting you through 2 more Ubuntu releases and to the next LTS.
This is what annoys me about the package management/release system of nearly every Linux distro. There's no easy way to cherry-pick just one package (and its dependencies, obviously) from the bleeding-edge branch. It's all or nothing.
Ultimately, flexible package management is what keeps me using Gentoo and dabbling with Exherbo, in spite of the fact that I don't really want to tinker with my OS anymore.
Comments
Maybe true, but as a web developer I can't in good conscience install an OS for a user that won't upgrade to FF4 for more than 6 months. That's the PPA/milestone release system's blessing and curse: easy to install software, hard to get the latest version without terminal witchcraft or upgrading the entire distro and eating whatever other changes (Unity) that upgrade brings.
Just had another look over the policy:
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/FirefoxNewVersion
Seems perfectly reasonable, and more importantly, prudent given the LTS nature.
To summarize:
* FF4 is available in a PPA right now - ppa:mozillateam/firefox-stable * 10.04 will continue use FF3.6 in main as long as Mozilla supports it (probably about 6 more months) * Once mozilla stops support for 3.6, 10.04 will switch to the latest stable (if that is FF5, that is what gets installed).
Seems very reasonable. Imagine if you are a huge corporation and you standardized on Ubuntu 10.04. Would you want every package to get updated to the latest and greatest each time it comes out or would you want security updates to those packages? If you want latest and greatest, jump on the 6 month cycle. If you want to get security updates for a known system, stick to the LTS. Even so, for those that WANT to get the latest of select packages, there are ways.
So, if you feel that having the latest and greatest for your users is important, stick to the non-LTS cycle and pick it and go. You can also install 10.10.
Have a look at the EOL dates...you can use 10.10 with full support until April 2012, getting you through 2 more Ubuntu releases and to the next LTS.
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases
This is what annoys me about the package management/release system of nearly every Linux distro. There's no easy way to cherry-pick just one package (and its dependencies, obviously) from the bleeding-edge branch. It's all or nothing.
Ultimately, flexible package management is what keeps me using Gentoo and dabbling with Exherbo, in spite of the fact that I don't really want to tinker with my OS anymore.