Hacker News Reader

Is it generally considered better to go with a better supported OS (eg CentOS or an Ubuntu LTS) and use extra package sources for non-OS programs or to use a more up to date OS that's already tested with the latest programs?

We made this choice recently, choosing Ubuntu 12.04 and a few (popular but unofficial) PPAs, rather than use Ubuntu 13.04.

View on HN

Wise choice, because non-LTS version of Ubuntu is basically piece of shit.

It's not that non-LTS releases are "shit"...Just that you'd be a fool to sign up for replacing your OS every 18 months on a server that will be in service for more than 3 years (which is the average lifespan of a server, and that number seems to be growing).

Depends on the environment.

I manage a large AWS environment at my current gig, and all of our code is in git. With configs in puppet, code in git, I can deploy to new OS version instances in the background, do testing/QA, and then swap out the old OS environment for the new one all transparently to the user.

Now if you're talking bare metal, yes, it makes sense to go with LTS releases.

It all depends on what your equipment lifecycle is.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com