Re: more and more broken packages?
On Wednesday, January 22, 2003, at 01:20 pm, Eduard Bloch wrote:
It is flawed. It was from the beginning. Testing is either reliable
(since the criterium to make a package go to does not really depend on
how many upstream bugs have been fixed), nor secure since there seem to
be no real motivation to make security updates from it. Testing has
defined as a shadow of Unstable, but supposed to play the role of
frozen. Created to confuse the developers, to create hardly explainable
interrupts in the Sid developments, to make major flaws appear less
harmful and keep whinning users quiet.
Oh do behave. Testing is a perfectly useful distribution for a machine
things which are not in stable, is being run by someone who doesn't
want the extra hassles of tracking unstable, and is either not in a
situation where security is a serious problem or could take packages
from unstable when security updates dictate.
It becomes progressively more useful as we get further from the last
release and nearer to the next -- which doesn't mean it's not useful at
the start of that period.
If we had the resources and inclination to "do" security updates for it
then that would make it, in practice, probably the most useful of all 3
distributions for most users.