Re: Is anyone using woody in a production environment?

[James Cameron <cameron@fax.sno.cpqcorp.net>]

I agree with Martin ... you can smell a freeze coming.  It's fantastic.

I use woody for two Compaq production intranet servers, and a mix of
potato/woody for one important server that I cannot risk something going
wrong on during an upgrade.  All three servers are about 450km from me,
hence the caution.

For a pair of Australian outback internet cafes, I'm using potato in one
because I've not needed any new packages, and woody in the other because
I did.  A set of four training workstations I've pushed to sid to get
galeon.

For my home telecommute network, my gateway is potato with source
rebuilds of one or two woody packages, and the eight other machines are
woody.

For four computers that I've donated to farmers or ranchers in the area,
they are on woody just to get the latest tested desktop features; gnome,
abiword, gnumeric, gnucash ... and for some of them I've pushed them to
sid just to get galeon and evolution going.

Most people I know on IRC with Debian production servers are using
woody.  They need too many of the recent features to justify potato.

-- 
James Cameron                                 (james.cameron@compaq.com)

http://quozl.linux.org.au/         (or)         http://quozl.netrek.org/