Re: How long 'till Sarge->Stable?
On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 10:14:52PM -0600, SigmaX wrote:
> The 'new user' to Linux we would put on testing, not stable. The Debian
> stable model is ideal for servers. Yes, you might end up running Apache
> 1.3 for two years after Apache 2.0 came out, but you're operating system
> is rock-solid-stable because for those two years it's only been getting
> more and more stable and secure.
Plus there are those of us who say, "Apache 1.3 works and does
everything I want it to. Why would I want to switch?" Debian's
policy of backporting security fixes means that there is rarely any
real need to have the latest and (supposedly) greatest version of
something unless it adds new features that you'll actually use.
Staying up-to-the-minute is so important for the rest of the world,
IMO, primarily because that's the only way to minimize security
risks. (Well, that and because there are lots of marketing
departments spending tons of money telling everyone that you have to
have the newest everything...)
> this, I say, is a short interlude
> before Sid becomes testing,
Minor nitpick: sid will never become testing, frozen, or stable. It
will be unstable until the end of time (or until Debian decides to
abandon the Toy Story names). A new testing will be spun off from
sid (and named, IIRC, etch), but sid will be unaffected by this.
--
The freedoms that we enjoy presently are the most important victories of the
White Hats over the past several millennia, and it is vitally important that
we don't give them up now, only because we are frightened.
- Eolake Stobblehouse (http://stobblehouse.com/text/battle.html)
Reply to: