[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Woody and start anew, XF4.2 and Mozilla too.

At 04:17 PM 6/10/2002 -0500, Paul Baker wrote:

On Sunday, June 9, 2002, at 03:24 AM, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:

Potato was released August 15, 2000. That means Woody is approaching two
years. (http://www.debian.org/News/2000/20000815)

Slink was released March 9, 1999. That means potato took 18 months.

Hamm was released July 24, 1998. That means slink took a little over 7
months. (http://www.debian.org/News/1998/19980724)

Debian 1.3 was released June 2, 1997. That means Hamm took almost 14
months. (http://www.debian.org/News/1997/19970602)

Before this, the News section does not tell.

Woody will be the longest Debian release cycle to date. Hopefully for

If you ask me, that is a testament to just how good of a release Potato was that we were able to wait almost 2 years before releasing a major revision.

This is not directly sent to Paul, it looks like you are not the only person that is happy about the 2 year upgrade cycle.

It appears that many of you were able to wait 2 years without any sort of upgrades... I must finally put in my $0.02 now that I have spent so much time reading all of these treads about the release cycle and the availability of the bleeding edge software. Is X4.2 or Mozilla 1.0 in Woody or not... bla bla bla.

Makes me proud to be a Debian user, and relieves me as a System Administrator that I don't have to go through major software upgrade pains every 6 months in order to make sure my system is up-to-date with security fixes. A new release every 2 years is plenty quick if you ask me.

In the world of Microsoft, most all of the upgrades are "Feature Enhancements" and not really true bug fixes... This world has taught most all [L]users that software must be upgraded very often. We admins don't really like this idea however we support the users. This mostly comes at the cost of much wasted time spent by the Sysadmins that have to figure out how to do something when there isn't any slick neato wiz bang "Wise Instillation/Conversion Wizard" This is not always the case with [LU]nix as we don't need Wizards or point-and-click to get things done smoothly.

When you are maintaining a cluster of systems, OS upgrades are the things you most dread because there is a lot, I repeat A LOT of testing that must be done before rolling things out.

You test on a non-production machine if/when you have one... I know that you already know this however some of us don't have "test boxes" and must be very careful when upgrading, this is where I only want security fixes... I have a copy of vmware, this is my test box!

One of the reasons I use Debian is that I don't have to expose the stability of my systems to Microsoft like release cycles that most of the other Linux distributions put their users through.

There is a reason for this fast pace release cycle that other Linux distributions like to use, it's following the same ideals that Microsoft releases so often. We as systems admins are forced to support the users that rely on our systems. The users require that we have available to them all the latest and greatest versions of stuff.

I ran 2 systems for a company and those machines were potato boxes. One of the developers required php 4.1.something. This is NOT available in potato. This was also before I really knew how to manage the selection of packages from newer version of Debian (get it from woody/sid while running a potato box)

I had to build apache/mod_perl/php from source and install them. This was fine except shortly after that, the machine was rooted. The only software on these systems that wasn't Debian was the above mentioned pieces and qmail/vpopmail. I wasn't subscribed to this list as well as others and all I did was use dselect to update these systems every so often and did see security updates come in occasionally... The bad guys actually deleted all the web site's content dirs, the vpopmail dir (all email on the box!) and even the MySql table files and last but not least, they nuked "/bin". These machines live in San Diego, I live in West Virginia... I had to have the disks fedex'ed to me so I could recover as much as possible. New disks were installed and those machines have been running woody since. The moral of the story, a developer required software not available in the Debian system (as far as I was able to determine at the time) and it got my systems hacked. I want to be able to support the users with the required software with the latest features and have the help of the Debian Security team keeping things up to date. Saying no to newer versions of stuff in "stable" is asking for trouble like I had. I don't have any real suggestion on how to keep these upgrades from happening automatically so don't ask me how this should be done without actually holding all the packages you don't want to upgrade.

If the newest version of a software package is made into a .deb package, you don't need to install it but when one of your [L]users/developers demand that you to use it, you can have the support of the Debian security team when you do install it. XF4.2 when ready and Mozilla 1.0 should be available even if not the "default" install version of these packages.

I am not a Debian Developer yet but will be working on becoming one when I decide I have the time to commit to the project. I have however been following this list for about 6 months now and been a Debian user/admnistrator since slink was released.

This is my opinion and you may or may not agree with me, that is ok or too bad, your choice.


Paul Baker

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
         -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759

GPG Key: http://homepage.mac.com/pauljbaker/public.asc

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: