It's a cutting-edge distro with 6-month release and 13-month support cycles.

Whereas Debian/Ubuntu have 5 years and RHEL/Alma/Rocky have 10 years.

I don't feel like this really answers the question thought, right? At least not at face value.

I could see the side of maintenance burden being a potential point, meaning that one would be "pushed" to update the system between releases more often than something else.

▲

p_ing 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Typically you want stability and predictability in a server. A platform that has a long support lifecycle is often more attractive than one with a short lifecycle.

If you can stay on v12.x for 10 years versus having to upgrade yearly yo maintain support, that’s ideal. 12.x should always behave the same way with your app where-as every major version upgrade may have breaking changes.

Servers don’t need to change, typically. They’re not chasing those quick updates that we expect on desktops.

	▲	zuntaruk 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yeah, and that's the take I assumed to hear based on what was said. However, for something like ARM and the use case this particular device may have, in reality you would _want_ (my opinion) to be on a more rolling release distros to pick up the updates that make your system perform better. I'd take a similar stance for devices that are built in a homelab for running LLMs.

▲

g947o 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I take it as no more than someone's personal opinion, since there is no reference provided whatsoever.