On Wednesday, May 14, 2003, at 10:57 PM, Michael Stone wrote: <snip>
That assumption is both false and absurd. Testing has exactly twoadvantages over unstable--1) all dependencies are satisfied and 2) knownrc bugs don't propagate to testing. In all other respects unstable is better. (Security problems, rc bugs not noticed during the first two weeks, etc.)
And to this day testing is primarily useful near a release, when testing*does* get security attention, and when fixes are pushed to testing. We are not currently near a release.
If this is really the intention of the testing distribution, then it's both badly named and rather pointless.
We'd be better off going back to just turning unstable into frozen when we're near a release and getting rid of testing entirely. That way people won't be running a distribution you claim they shouldn't be, until we're at the stage when it's appropriate.
Description: This is a digitally signed message part