Re: testing or unstable?

[Paul E Condon <pecondon@mesanetworks.net>]

On 2009-02-17_13:02:38, Rodolfo Medina wrote:
> I've been using Debian for more than three years now, but always using the
> official DVDs of the most current stable version: first Sarge, and then Etch.
> 
> Recently, many times I've been needing to use a testing/unstable Debian version
> for many applications that were too old in stable Debian, so now I'm thinking
> of switching to a testing/unstable Debian version for good.
> 
> Now, my question is: which one is more advisable, testing or unstable?
> 
> Excuse the basicness of my question, thanks for any reply
> Rodolfo
> 
Rodolfo,
 I have a different take on this issue. Rather than discuss the
relative merits of stable, testing, I think you should consider the
merits of lenny, squeeze. Using code names (lenny, squeeze, etc.)
allows you to choose when big changes in your system happen. I would
not run testing during the next several weeks because there was a
freeze on moving packages from unstable into testing in preparation
for the official release of lenny. As soon as lenny became stable, the
freeze was lifted and all sorts of flaky stuff that the release
manager wouldn't let into a product that was about to be released has
come flooding into testing. The point is that the stability of testing
is time dependent. Right after a release it can be somewhat
unstable. For a _long_ duration before a release, it is quite stable,
and much more modern than the official stable. I always use code names
in my sources.list. That way I am never hit with a bunch of changes
right after a release. In a little while, after the flood of held-back
packages abates, I will dist-upgrade to squeeze.  Or, if there is a
persistent flood of questions about new packages in squeeze on
debian-user, I will defer the dist-upgrade until things settle down.

lenny, and squeeze are not the same as stable and testing. They change
at different times. Right now squeeze is rather unstable. Right now,
people who were running stable before the release are confronted with
a whole bunch of software that is new-to-them. Many of them may be 
unable to deal with the learning _now_. They could have chosen the
time of the transition by running etch until they are ready to spend
some time on playing with a new toy. When they are ready, they point
sources.list to lenny. stable and testing are for developers. etch,
lenny, and squeeze are for timid users, like me.

-- 
Paul E Condon           
pecondon@mesanetworks.net