Re: problems with the concept of unstable -> testing
On Tuesday 16 December 2008 10:06, Romain Beauxis <toots@rastageeks.org>
wrote:
> > Is that important? Unstable is frozen for nearly 1/2 year now, that's a
> > problem we should try to solve if we don't want to degrade ourselves to
> > a server-only distribution.
>
> You can't get both recent *and* stabilized software. For a solid release to
> be done, one needs to hold new improvements for a while.
I think it would be good if we could take time to stabilise the server version
while continuing to work on development versions.
The Fedora vs RHEL model that Red Hat uses has some benefits.
If we were to follow that idea then we could skip most of the X stuff from the
server variant. My observation is that it's pretty common to use GNOME and a
KVM switch (or similar functionality such as HP ILO) to manage RHEL servers
while for Debian servers most people just use command-line utilities with
SSH.
Note that I am not strongly advocating the Fedora vs RHEL model, because it
does involve a moderate amount of extra work.
--
russell@coker.com.au
http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Main Blog
http://doc.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog
Reply to: