Re: Where is Debian going?
On Wed, 2002-07-10 at 22:51, Thatcher Ulrich wrote:
> On Jul 11, 2002 at 02:04 +0800, csj wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 11:03:17 -0500
> > "Jamin W. Collins" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > I see potato as a release for servers and other mission critical systems.
> > > As such, I don't see much if any need for an X install on these.
> > That's the problem. It seems that in Debian stable=server. It's the same
> > thing with posters who say they won't touch linux 2.4 because it isn't
> > stable, when by stable they mean being able to run a system for one year
> > without a reboot.
> > Maybe instead of stable, testing, and unstable, we can have: server
> > (must be stable), desktop (with newer but not bleeding edge stuff) and
> > developer (because they're the ones who're in the best position to fix
> > it).
> Yeah, I totally agree. I don't think there's anything particularly
> broken about Debian from the point of view of a computer enthusiast
> who is willing to spend time reading docs and mailing lists; in fact I
> think it's absolutely the best thing going for someone like that.
I concur. The names testing and unstable give those distributions a
"better not go there" feeling which in my opinion is unwarranted.
Three symlinks is all it takes and some additional docs. Where do we
vote for such policies ?
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org