Re: Where is Debian going?
Hi,
I happen to like the debian schema the way it is.
When I first learned about Debian, (around when slink was stable), I had
no problems understanding the way the 3 versions worked. All it took it was
a few minutes reading debian.org. If it wasn't for Debian, I probably would
have given up on Linux all together.
I find the Toy Story names cool.
Hope things stay as is.
Just my $.5 cent. :)
Cheers,
Mike
Quoting Thatcher Ulrich <tu@tulrich.com>:
> On Jul 10, 2002 at 06:49 -0500, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 05:51:20PM -0400, Thatcher Ulrich wrote:
> > | MHO newbie opinion: emphasize version numbers (2.x, 3.x, 4.x) and
> >
> > That sounds fine for a "you can only get 'stable'" release method
> > (like every commercial software house runs it), however what version
> > is sid/unstable? What about testing?
>
> This is what I mean:
>
> potato == 2.x
> woody == 3.x
> sid == 4.x
>
> and deprecate the names. As of now,
>
> stable == 2.x
> testing == 3.x
> unstable == 4.x
>
> subject to change! So use the names more as description. Use the
> numbers as designation.
>
> > How hard is it really to learn that
> > "unstable" means
> latest-and-greatest-but-who-knows-if-it-breaks-your-system
> > "testing" means tested-a-bit-and-should-work-but-YMMV
> > "stable" means tested-a-lot-and-is-really-stable
>
> Pretty easy; much easier than learning how to configure X. But still
> hard on newbies, who are by definition more familiar with other OS's.
> It's the very first stumbling block after deciding to try Debian, and
> I think it's unnecessarily harmful.
>
> I've personally figured it out by now. All I'm saying is that in the
> critical early moments of introducing myself to Debian, my pea-brain
> would have had a much easier time with { 2.x, 3.x, 4.x } instead of {
> potato, woody, sid }.
>
> > | The Toy Story code names are cute but totally confusing; I say ditch
> 'em.
> >
> > Everyone has names -- even RH and Mandrake (Seawolf, Enigma, Cooker).
> > There's nothing wrong with the names, really.
>
> Maybe what I'm reaching for is that Debian needs "marketing names",
> which really ought to be numbers, for minimum confusion. Red Hat has
> their 6.0, 6.1, 7.0; Windows has their 3.1, 95, 98, 2000, XP; Mac has
> their 9.1, X, 10.2. All the Red Hat distros I used before starting w/
> Debian had cute South Park names, but as a user I didn't have to
> remember which was which.
>
> --
> Thatcher Ulrich
> http://tulrich.com
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: