Re: When stability is pointless

[tyler <tyler.smith@mail.mcgill.ca>]

"Sam Kuper" <sam.kuper@uclmail.net> writes:
>
> A number of comments missed my main point, which was:
>
> When 'stable' packages don't work, or are inadequately documented,
> it's a pain because the upstream developers (who are otherwise often
> the first port of call for help and documentation) may no longer
> support the version of the software that the stable package installs.
>

I'm still missing your point here. The example you gave was _not_ of a
stable package not working, it was a stable package that didn't conform
to documentation for a *different* more recent version of the package.
What you appear to want is for upstream developers or package
maintainers to make sure that all the features of the latest release of
a package are fully documented not only for that release, but also for
previous releases. You seem to be overlooking the fact that _new_
features are _new_ exactly because they aren't present in _old_ versions
of a program.

So, unless there's some detail I've missed here, there already exist
individual and community solutions to your problem - install it yourself
from source, or make and share a backported .deb.

Tyler