Re: User-contrib, up-to-date stable
Paul> Right! It is inacceptable to have to rely on slightly outdated
Paul> software when running a system which has to stay reasonably stable
Paul> and you do need this new version of package xyz existing in 'hamm'.
That is nonsense, and not very polite to boot. For well over two years, I
'risked', among other things, my PhD dissertation by using 'unstable' as my
sole computing platform --- which proved to be an extremely stable, reliable
and productive computing environment to get not only that dissertation
done. There is nothing wrong with using "unstable" if you want to be cutting
edge. You risk what you called 'hazzles' and 'annoyances' by using *cutting
edge upstream releases* anyway.
Furthermore, I do not accept that you call this 'unacceptable'. We are all
volunteers, and we owe you nothing. Point.
What we need is to work on auto-compiling the distribution. That way, we can
privide it all under different sets of parameters as libc version etc. [1]
[1] Provided there is sufficient cpu power, diskspace, bandwidth etc.
--
edd@debian.org http://rosebud.sps.queensu.ca/~edd PGP KeyID 1024/6D7F08DD
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: