Re: branding debian releases
Actually, I think Monique is incorrect for once.
Unstable is less stable than testing. But it's the
only way to go, in my humble opinion.
--- Anthony Campbell <ac@acampbell.org.uk> wrote: > On
14 Apr 2004, Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
> >
> [snip]
>
> > My understanding of the 'testing' distribution is
> in conflict with your
> > description. Testing is the last to receive
> security updates, and I
> > believe it is more prone to wide-ranging package
> bugs than is unstable.
> > I see it more as a developer sandbox than a live
> distribution.
> >
> > Am I wrong?
> >
>
> I don't know, but I hope so! :)
>
> I have to admit to keeping up to date with testing
> for well over a year,
> but lacking the courage to make more than occasional
> forays into
> unstable. But if you are right, perhaps I ought to
> change my policy.
>
> Anthony
> --
> ac@acampbell.org.uk ||
> http://www.acampbell.org.uk
> using Linux GNU/Debian || for book reviews,
> electronic
> Windows-free zone || books and skeptical
> articles
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
> debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Reply to: