Re: Chromium 11 on Debian 6.0.1 Stable
On Wed, 25 May 2011 08:50:56 -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> In <[🔎] pan.2011.05.25.11.55.13@gmail.com>, Camaleón wrote:
>>Today's
>>browsers upgrade to a new version in just two months (!) and you are
>>left with an obsolete package for several years.
>
> "Obsolete" isn't the right term.
How would you call the Firefox 3.0.x branch? Legacy?
> <http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/obsolete>
***
obsolete (comparative more obsolete, superlative most obsolete)
1. (of words, equipment, etc.) no longer in use; gone into disuse;
disused or neglected (often by preference for something newer, which
replaces the subject).
(...)
Synonyms
* (no longer in use): ancient, antiquated, antique, archaic, disused,
neglected, old, old-fashioned, out of date
***
"Obsolete" can fit.
> I continued to use Lenny's Iceweasel and Chromium until about a month
> before the Squeeze release, and both received maintenance releases
> during the Lenny lifecycle.
Sure, I'm still with Lenny and will keep it until Wheezy comes out.
> Packages in Debian stable and oldstable might not be the most recently
> available from upstream (and this is true of *most* packages, not just
> web browsers), but they are generally well-maintained, quite usable, and
> in-use (by me, if no one else.)
Nobody said the opposite but that policy is not always the most
convenient for some users. It's not a Debian's fault nor mainstream
project's fault but users need to keep their browsers up-to-date and
Mozilla, Google, Opera... all keep releasing new versions in a very short
period which difficults packaging on non-rolling distributions.
Greetings,
--
Camaleón
Reply to: