Re: What's wrong with debian?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 01 Mar 2005 8:07 am, Chris Metzler wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:33:50 +0100
>
> Jan Lühr wrote:
> > Am Montag, 28. Februar 2005 23:24 schrieb Robert Brockway:
> >> IMHO the best way to approach the release cycle is to aim to make it
> >> fairly regular (12-18 months would be ideal) with modest aims. The
> >> _only_ significant criticism I hear about Debian is the age of the
> >> stable version. If it was not for this I believe it would have a far
> >> large share of Linux installations to its name. It's got the
> >> stability and the integration people want.
> >
> > and the insecurity people don't want.
>
> Can you clarify what you mean by this statement?
>
> -c
If the release starts happening as per Jan's proposal, Debian would be /... as
one of those insecure/unstable distributions which disguise as stable but
often keep breaking.
Do you think a deadline based release cycle would be feasible for a community
like Debian to maintain it's reputation.
I remember one line from Debian's documentations.
"Stable never breaks".
Please don't let this line be untrue.
PS: Does this answer you Chris ?
rrs
- --
Ritesh Raj Sarraf
RESEARCHUT -- http://www.researchut.com
Gnupg Key ID: 04F130BC
"Stealing logic from one person is plagiarism, stealing from many is
research".
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFCJLkG4Rhi6gTxMLwRAhvvAJ48NQbG91W7g1HA32ft/+qoHHhiZACeOe/n
OmaEh51EHWki0FJRej/VaGM=
=NJ5M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: