In my last post, I summarized my problems with the latest version of Ubuntu: Jaunty Jackalope. I’m not the only one cribbing about it, though. Many bloggers out there are doing a better job than I am, posting problems with solutions to them. Forums are abuzz with all the issues right from screen flicker to sudden OS freeze to wireless connectivity. In short, everything is normal.
The problem with Ubuntu, however, is that with the frenzied pace of development and the releases being churned almost twice yearly, I am quite certain that most of the bugs reported for this release will be ignored or will be prioritized “Low”, meaning they are kept for “later” (read: never). While this is an issue with even slow-moving projects, I am (or at least, was) quite impressed with the way Ubuntu maintained quality till Hardy Heron. Most of the packages “Just worked” post installation, with a few hiccups here and there. Hardware, drivers and graphics did remain a concern, but that is something we have to live with for a while, given the low interest of manufacturers for providing Linux drivers.
Anyway, back to the point: The current pace of development for Ubuntu guarantees a lot of loose ends in newer releases. In contrast the Debian community goes for “release when ready” philosophy. However, they suffer from delays and more delays in releases, leading people to believe that Ubuntu is the right way.
Which brings the question, what, really, is “the right way”? Most will consider a “middle way out” but that is easier said than done. Granting developers’ request for more time on the basis of an incomplete feature or a yet-to-fix bug list will eventually lead to a heavily-delayed release. On the other hand, having a strict deadline means that you are ready to compromise on the quality of the release. While this matches the “release early, release often” philosophy*, there’s a slight disconnect when it comes to having a product eager to replace Microsoft Windows, as is described in… Bug #1 for Ubuntu.
Microsoft has a majority market share in the new desktop PC marketplace. This is a bug, which Ubuntu is designed to fix.
Back to the point (again), Paul Graham also corrects the general perspective for “release early”:
By “release early” I don’t mean you should release something full of bugs, but that you should release something minimal. Users hate bugs, but they don’t seem to mind a minimal version 1, if there’s more coming soon.
So far, I don’t see any awesome release philosophy with a strong way to maintain the pace, while maintaining the quality. All we can do, maybe, is to have an in-between release to just “fix more and add less”. This is where developers may find themselves in bug-fixing mode, instead of their favourite “building that cool app”, but its all for the greater good, no?
* I never dreamt I’d link to ESR one day, but anyway I’m disagreeing with him, so no problemo