Re: testing versus unstable: tradeoffs?
Roberto Sanchez <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Personally, I run unstable on all the workstations I administer.
> But, then again, I like living dangerously :-)
> If your people want more current apps, then think about backports
> (either from www.backports.org, or doing it yourself).
Doing it myself didn't go so well. Last time I tried to start with
apt-src which lead to this and that, and finally somebody told me
that if I continue, I get to make my very personal gcc transition. I
didn't want to make my personal gcc transition ;-)
backports.org is a cool site, but it doesn't have *that* many
backports. I'm using it at the moment, though.
> For some apps, like OpenOffice, you can just run the binary
> version of the website, rather than messing with a backport.
> If you use a good tool, like systemimager, to manage the
> replication, it will be a lot easier than wondering if something
> will break every time you apt-get upgrade.
Ah, systemimager. I didn't know that exists. I wonder what it
does. I'm afraid that we need more than simple system images --
maybe systemimager provides this.