[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Where is Debian going?



>>>>> "Thatcher" == Thatcher Ulrich <tu@tulrich.com> writes:

[...]

Thatcher> stable == 2.x
Thatcher> testing == 3.x
Thatcher> unstable == 4.x

testing and unstable are constantly changing (except for now, when
testing is in a freeze), so it doesn't make any sense to give them
numbers.  The only real designation that would make sense for testing
and unstable would be the date of your last apt-get upgrade (and even
then it could be inaccurate, depending on what mirror you use.  Also, I
believe the master archive is prone to change at any time during the
day...).

Nothing should have a version number until it becomes stable.  Until
then, the codename is the only way you should be referring to it.

Really, the only reason anyone is complaining (ok, two reasons, the
second probably being the main reason) are
- Debian has a very open development model.  What you see in the
  unstable archive is basically what the developers are working on too.
  They even have a public experimental repository, which is even more
  unstable than unstable, and if you want to be even more unstable,
  some developers will post super-unstable-almost-guaranteed-to-be-
  packaged-incorrectly packages on their own pages.  This means that
  everyone gets to see what's going on, and gets to criticize it.
- Woody is taking a long time to release, and Potato shipped with some
  old packages.  It's taken a long time due to various reasons that have
  been discussed before, so I won't go into them.  The developers will
  figure it out eventually, and once they get down to a sane release
  delay (a year or so between releases), you'll be able to run
  almost-ultra-cutting-edge stuff, and it'll be rock solid.  Then
  newbies shouldn't have to deal with anything other than stable (which
  will have version numbers attached, "just like the Big Boys!"), and
  people who have been around for a while, well, they'll already know
  the ropes.

-- 
Hubert Chan <hubert@uhoreg.ca> - http://www.uhoreg.ca/
PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/124B61FA
Fingerprint: 96C5 012F 5F74 A5F7 1FF7  5291 AF29 C719 124B 61FA
Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net.   Encrypted e-mail preferred.

Attachment: pgpW_5_aq8ycs.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: