Les Mikesell wrote: > On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 12:57, William Hooper wrote: > >>> The above approach would at least get a fairly recent set >>> of files with current updates on their computers. >> >> At the expense of time and effort that would be better spent on making >> the next release better. > > Which you trade off against fewer people using and testing because > of the inconvenience of having to download 800 megs of updates after each > install, or because long-fixed bugs in the release kernel prevent > installation at all. If Ubuntu is easier and faster to install, you will > lose all the testers. When did Ubuntu start doing releases faster than every six months? >> Also at the expense of using more bandwidth and >> storage space on the mirrors. > > There's no need to store all of the intermediate rev's of the > iso images, If you want to provide the old images while the new ones are syncing, you need space to hold both. That doubles the size of the current ISO mirror requirements. > and it would most likely result in less bandwidth usage since > the users would no longer have to download the iso and then do another > many hundred megs of update downloads for each machine installed. Bandwidth would increase because you will be syncing more bytes from the main server. Then you would get a group of people downloading every ISO set so they can have the newest set in case they need to install a new machine. Or people that have installed in the past downloading a newer set when doing a reinstall. -- William Hooper
