[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: "I do consider Ubuntu to be Debian" , Ian Murdock



On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 03:53:01AM -0700, Michael M. wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-03-26 at 14:45 -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> 
> > However, the predictability that it appears you want, timely releases at
> > predefined intervals, is not very likely to be realistic with Debian.
> 
> That's exactly right, at least based on the history of the project and
> its release cycles, such as they are.  That's the rub.  I'm not
> expecting or even asking that Debian change its character or modus
> operandi just for me (or for users like me, who would appreciate a
> greater emphasis on timeliness than currently exists).  I'm just saying
> it is what bugs me about how Debian works, and in the end, if anything
> finally causes me to move on to a different distro once and for all,
> it's that -- the lack of predictability; the long release cycles that
> result in the long feature freezes; that whatever "stable" happens to be
> at the time of release, it is inevitably behind the curve (compared to
> many other distros) in terms of freshness.  At the same time, it's also
> ahead of almost everybody else in terms of stablity and reliability.
> 
> As always, each user has to decide for himself whether any given OS's
> priorities are the best fit with his own priorities.  There's no "right
> answer" for everybody, or we'd all be using the same distro, a BSD,
> Windows, OS X.  
> 
As was already pointed out, if you want the latest and greatest, then
run with testing or unstable.  I wager that they are easily as stable
(if not more so) than other popular distros (like FC, for example).

Regards,

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: