Well done, jdong! I recommend everyone interested in backports read it:
jdong's article on DistroWatch
Archived thread 102836 from Ubuntu Backports. Markdown source: Ubuntu_Backports/thread_102836_jdong's_article_on_DistroWatch.md
Thanks -- It's an honor to be quoted in Distrowatch Weekly :)
grats Jdong
Nice article!
nice article! And I'm sure it clears things up for some of the backport users.
nice article! And I'm sure it clears things up for some of the backport users.
I would agree with you on this hopefully it does clear things up.
Congrats to jdong :)
great article
backports were always a mystery to me
i've been using linux a long time, and used to be happy just updating using tarballs.
I'd never understood why binary backports were so much harder to do well.
I moved from fedora to ubuntu hoping it would be better in terms of backports. It is alot better, thanks.
Well done, jdong! I recommend everyone interested in backports read it:
http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20051212#3
A very nice read indeed. Thanks.
At the same time, there are many Ubuntu users who use Ubuntu as an enterprise-class workstation OS for getting job-critical work done. For me to decide to introduce a new package that breaks a core application for them is not considerate to them, and causes them countless headaches.
surely anyone using an "enterprise-class" workstation with backports in the sources list is asking for trouble?
surely anyone using an "enterprise-class" workstation with backports in the sources list is asking for trouble?
I don't think so. Since official Backports (on archive.ubuntu.com) has started, we've had a 100% bug-free track record, and even a good portion of our work is closing stable release bugs via backports. We've maintained full system compatibility with non-Backports and upgrade paths have been tested and verified to be clean.
Think of Backports as the equivalent of RHEL update packs, only released a package at a time.