Re: etch or sid? (Was: Evince backport proposal)
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 12:21:19AM +0100, Paul Cupis wrote:
> Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> > It is quite frustrating to experience all the delays between an
> > upstream release and a stable Debian package - I want to minimise such
> > delay, and rely on fast updates, the "release early, release often"
> > way, rather than on a freeze period.
> Sounds like you should be running sid/unstable and helping with bug
I don't have a problem personaly (I use testing and I manually compile
what I need).
However, my clients do :)
I installed Debian because I want to install a distro that my company
can recommend ethically, and use technically. The technical side is
suffering because the software can be outdated, and I'd like to fix
that. I suppose Ubuntu or Fedora would solve this particular technical
problem, but is inferior at least ethically, so I won't use that.
Directly using sid is not possible - I need to rely on consistent
dependencies and cannot aford to have broken packages the day I'm
working on the client's systems. Using testing (except during freezes)
requires a bit too much maintainance for external clients. Backports
is ideal because you select which pieces of software you want to
upgrade, and it currently fails close to my goal :)
If bpo is this rigid wrt testing, I guess I need something that would
build on top of Sarge and backports (and possibly others). Or
something completely different.