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

Re: Dangers of "stable" in sources.list


   The discussion of `stable' vs. `etch' vs. `lenny'
vs. ... got me to thinking.  Is there any reason to offer
`stable' as an entry in sources.list?  Its drawback seems to

    o Every so often `stable' whacks you with about
      seventeen million updates, with the chance that you'll
      be left dead in the water.

Using the name (`sarge', e.g.) has the drawback that:

    o Eventually a named distro will drop off the end of the
      world, and get no more security updates.

OTOH, `unstable' is a necessary warning sign:  Here be
dragons.  Someone starting with Debian needs to know that
unstable has more surprises.  (Though, in my experience,
they're mostly like the ones you find in a box of Cracker

   So, my modest suggestion is that `stable' as a name
should be eradicated.  Roughly no downside, only closer
adherence to the principle of least astonishment.

[Runs for blast shelter...]

	    Best wishes,

	    	 Max Hyre

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: