Re: Ubuntu versions vs Debian versions?
Erik de Castro Lopo <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Agreed, but regardless of rolling vs stable releases, if someone were
> to say:
> "For any kind of serious Haskell development, it is safer to
> pick a Linux distribution with a rolling release schedule rather
> than one with periodic stable releases."
Safer? Really? The advantage of rolling releases is that you
continually get the latest and greatest. The advantage of stable
releases is that you get a consistent set of versions, so that many
people will have the same setup, and wrinkles can be worked out.
> Comparing rolling releases verses periodic stable releases, I find the
> many small glitches pretty evenly spread out across the year to be
> less painful than Ubuntu's twice a year up-heaval where I get all this
> small gitches bundled up together.
..but if you are in need of compatibility with the rest of your team,
you might want to set some sort of baseline instead of continuously
upgrading. And, in general, if you want to write software that should
work all over, you should choose a conservative development platform.
>> If you want to make a fair comparison
I agree; this isn't about being "fair", rather, it's about realizing the
consequences of your choices.
BTW, I'd be very interested (and surprised) in seeing real measurements
showing that Ubuntu is slower than Debian - I thought it'd basically be
the same thing, only delayed by six months or less.
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants