There's still a question of how quickly we move between releases. I'd be in favour of waiting at least one/two weeks after release until the usual collection of post-release fixes come out. Dunno if other people would like to see us wait longer.
Regardless, these things still should happen on a case by case basis, there's no point in installing a new release just because it's out if we know there are still bugs that would affect us.
^^ This sounds like a very sensible way of handling it. No need to jump the gun but move to the newest release as soon as we have a general idea that it wont cause more harm than good.
It seems to be generally better than 9.10 or so the lack of people bitching about it would indicate. I've only used the server version on a redbrick VM, upgraded from 10.04, no issue during or since installation.
Given the volume of bugs that are coming out of linux land these days, I'd be in favour of waiting a month or two. There's been a few vulnerabilities that have only affected 10.10 recently (Kat said there was a libpam one, etc) - this on top of the pile of holes that have affected everything. Also, do any of our packages need to be tested for 10.10? Upstart might kick up another tantrum or two, there's bound to be more stuff that's been moved over to that recently. -Andrew