Re: Test Debian : Release Goals, Point release, Foo-n-Half...
On Sun, Oct 05, 2008 at 05:19:09PM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> I would like to object to your labeling according to "risk". I don't think
> running unstable or testing is a high risk per se. As long as one doesn't
> upgrade onself into a terrible situation and knows how to downgrade a package,
> it is not much of a problem to run Debian unstable on one's work machine.
I think we should generally discourage the use of unstable to users; or
at least not advocate it. The support pressure is just much higher than
for testing, we frequently get support issues in #debian where unstable
users have problems with buggy maintainer scripts and cannot deal with
manually fixing them. This is in line with what #debian regulars
recommend; i.e. running stable+backports or testing, but not unstable.
So I think "stable+proposed updates" or "stable+backports" should be
"low" risk and "testing" should be "medium" risk, while unstable should
not be mentioned on that page at all.