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

Re: Chromium 11 on Debian 6.0.1 Stable

In <[🔎] pan.2011.>, Camaleón wrote:
>On Wed, 25 May 2011 08:50:56 -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>> In <[🔎] pan.2011.>, Camaleón wrote:
>>>browsers upgrade to a new version in just two months (!) and you are
>>>left with an obsolete package for several years.
>> "Obsolete" isn't the right term.
>How would you call the Firefox 3.0.x branch? Legacy?

I'd call 3.0.x deprecated but, I'd call 3.5.x stable. :P  I seriously don't 
trust upstreams, even the ones I depend on most.  Far too many bugs are found 
and fixed between upstream release and Debian release for anything Mozilla (or 
KDE) produces to be called "stable".

>> <http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/obsolete>
>obsolete (comparative more obsolete, superlative most obsolete)
>1. (of words, equipment, etc.) no longer in use; gone into disuse;
>disused or neglected (often by preference for something newer, which
>replaces the subject).
>* (no longer in use): ancient, antiquated, antique, archaic, disused,
>neglected, old, old-fashioned, out of date
>"Obsolete" can fit.

That are not "no longer in use", nor have they "gone into disuse", nor are 
they "disused or neglected".  So, no, they aren't obsolete.
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.                   ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net                   ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy         `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/                    \_/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: