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

[Michael Pobega <pobega@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 12:14:35PM -0400, Max Hyre wrote:
> Michael Pobega wrote:
> 
> > [Reviewers] don't understand the idea of the Debian
> > release schedule; It's aimed at servers, NOT home
> > computers.
> 
>    This one I disagree with.  I've never heard a developer
> say ``I'm building this for server admins.''  It's always
> ``I'm building the best damn' GNU/Linux system there is.'',
> where ``best'' is defined as Free-est and most stable.  This
> just happens to result in the distribution most useful for
> servers, but it's not built for them.  I run it on my home
> computers, and feel no bias against that use.
> 
>    IANADBIUWAIWTDP*  We shall release no Debian before its
> time.
> 

Debian Stable IS aimed for servers and not home computers. What I
meant by what I said is that the reviews always aim themselves at
Debian Stable, which is, let's call it, the "server branch" of
Debian's three branches. 

But when people review Debian they compare Debian Stable against
Ubuntu 6.10 (Or the upcoming 7.04, which isn't even OUT yet) and
always say how Debian is an outdated distro. They fail to understand
the Debian release cycle, and the way packages make their way through
the three (Four if you count experimental) branches of Debian.

In other words: Reviewers compare Debian stable against Ubuntu's beta
releases, which is an unfair comparison.