Re: unstable is "unstable"; stable is "outdated"
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
On 2/1/02 at 4:25 PM Tim Quinlan wrote:
>> kernel, etc... and as we all know, jumping from "stable" to "unstable"
>> problem-prone and doesn't worth flawlessly every time.
>Why jump all the way to unstable, why not use testing? Testing is
>usually stable enough for most applications plus the various software
>packages are pretty up to date.
In my experience unstable is pretty damn stable as well. I upgraded a couple of boxen from stable to unstable a little over a year ago and haven't been bit by any of the big bugs. I just check the mailing lists and debian planet to see if anything big has popped up before doing an apt-get update && apt-get upgrade. Obviously these aren't servers.
I think the only problem with debian is the naming. Changing nothing but the name from "unstable" to "cutting edge" or something and there wouldn't be close to the outcry about how 'behind' debian is. IMHO.
>To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
>with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com
Is uniformity attainable? Millions of innocent men, women, and
children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt,
tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards
uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half
of the world fools, and the other half hypocrites.
-- Thomas Jefferson