Re: Desktop user: Etch or the next testing?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Glen Pfeiffer wrote:
> ---- Wei Chen wrote:
>> So I'd say that maybe Stable is really not for Desktop use.
>> Testing is the best choice because it is neither too dangerous
>> nor too old.
>
> What do you think about adding a new release type maybe called
> "current"? Then our release structure would look like this:
>
> -------------
> | Unstable |------
> ------------- |
> | |
> | |
> ----------- |
> | Testing | |
> ----------- |
> | |
> -------------------- |
> | | |
> ---------- -----------
> | Stable | | Current |
> ---------- -----------
>
> Current would get both security and feature updates. We could
> advertise this as the perfect blend of stability and up-to-date
> software. Immediately after a release, Current would lag behind
> Testing so it would be more stable. Conversely, during the freeze
> we might be able to pull some packages from Unstable.
>
> I am pretty new to Debian so I am sure there are a thousand
> reasons why the above is a bad idea, or just too hard to
> implement. But it seems like it's worth discussing. And before
> anyone gives me a hard time let me say, "I am not complaining".
>
> --
> Glen
>
>
There might be problems I guess. Firstly, there needs to be a lot of
manpower to maintain a new release. Developers may end up having less
time for new features to be adopted in. Secondly, if the specification
is not defined very clearly, there might be confusion for the developers
or release managers.
- --
Cheers,
Wei Chen
http://www.acplex.com/people/wchen/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFGEiXeCIqXQV6BF28RAuFAAKC3CSbwe7ENuVyPvxETLQLEGsHvTQCfUfxe
faEqzIhBvhYLWgBqVInJyU8=
=haLW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: