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

Re: updated debian development diagram -- comments?

On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 10:47:50AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Jan 2005, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > unstable is described as suited for "...laptops and desktops on non-critical 
> > systems..." 
> > testing is described as "... can be used for desktop systems that need more 
> > stability..."
> > 
> > I think this both is wrong. Unstable and testing should not be described as 
> > suited for desktops - they are development branches of debian, which are 
> > likely to break, which break and... so on. Most of you know :)
> Agreed.  Unstable is recommended only for people that "know what they are
> doing".  Certainly not for desktop usage, or anything like that.
> As for "testing", well, that one can be recommended to users that need a
> very up-to-date system but who can tolerate the lack of speedy security
> updates... AND who know how to deal with ocasional breakage (yes, sometimes
> it happens even in testing).
> > good ol' "debian releases to seldom" argument...) - but as said I don't think 
> > Debian should propagate this misconcepts.
> Agreed.
Hi Henrique and Holger,
thanks for pointing out those points in the wording. I have removed
those because they are not in agreement with Debian's position. 
I added (hopefully) more informative comments.

counter.li.org #238656 -- goto counter.li.org and be counted!

 / |    ||
*  /\---/\
   ~~   ~~
...."Have you mooed today?"...

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: