On Tue, 19 Apr 2005, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
No one says you can't run debian testing on a desktop. I do it all the time. Now perhaps what would make it a better idea is if somehow the security team had the resources to support testing. testing still breaks less often than FC releases are broken as far as I can tell from reading people's reports on using them.
You are making me wonder why, from a purely practical or techincal standpoint, Ubuntu isn't just another "tier" in Debian's architecture. If the problem is that people want new stuff faster, then an additional layer(s) where early adopters play is only an improvement for the layers below.
Why isn't Ubuntu sid? Or why isn't Ubuntu whatever-is-after-sid? Or why isn't it the permanent "experimental" tier?
It makes me wonder if there are political or personal problems in Debian's hierarchy, that would make people want to go such an effort alone rather than leverage more of Debian's considerable resources. Or is it a matter of Ubuntu wanting to make distribution-level engineering decisions that they can't create a consensus on? And if so, why? Bad ideas? Or a "bad community?"
So many of the things that make a better desktop also make a better server. Usually, when the two goals come into conflict, the conflict can be solved with straightforward installer and package work. How many times is there really a techincal reason for any deeper schism?
The biggest reason I wonder about all this is because of the clearly weird treatment pure64 seems to get from mainstream Debian at times...