Re: Woody or Sarge
<#secure method=pgp mode=sign>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Adi Linden <email@example.com> writes:
>> If you're satisfied with the existing feature set, are new features
>> really anywhere near as important as security fixes? Particularly
>> when it comes to production servers?
> New features aren't important at all. It is all about maintaining the
> current state of a server while keeping it secure on a hostile network.
> And with the least amount of effort, where security updates do not break
OK, then don't worry about the release cycle. What you get on
security.debian.org should get what you need done until the next
>> Not long after the next Stable happens, because it's not hard to
>> upgrade in Debian. 18 months seems about average, IIRC.
> This means that for longest possible support I should be looking at
> deploying Sarge, not Woody. How timely are security issues addressed in a
Given that you're the one supporting it, which are you willing to
support? Right now, your safest bet is still woody, though sarge has
regular, near-daily updates (which can get annoying), as it is still,
essentially, in beta.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----