On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 06:31:49PM -0400, Christopher Browne wrote: > On 4/18/05, Ed Cogburn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I full agree here: Ubuntu is more attractive to the average end user. > > > But I do not understand why everybody is so upset about this. After > > > all, there is no "one size fits all" distribution. > > > > No, I'm not saying Ubuntu will kill Debian or vice-versa, or anything like, > > but I am saying that the more energy and momentum for a desktop system > > Ubuntu > > takes from Debian, the longer it will be for Debian itself to get its act > > together on the desktop, because everyone who wants to see Debian on the > > desktop are now saying "Why not just use Ubuntu?", and are moving to it. > > It seems to me that this misses part of the real problem. > > As far as I can see, the main merit of Ubuntu isn't anything to do > with "desktop" support, but rather to do with the fact that it is > several years more up to date than Debian/stable. > > I find it ludicrous that Debian/stable still has PostgreSQL 7.2.1 as > the "latest official" version of PostgreSQL even though there have > been a whole ream of security updates and other fairly severe bug > fixes in the binary compatible 7.2.x series. And despite the > PostgreSQL project getting accused of having long release cycles, that > doesn't even touch the fact that there have been three _MAJOR_ release > cycles (7.3.x, 7.4.x, and 8.0.x) since then. > > And I usually _am_ something of a curmudgeon on stability of releases; > at work, we never wound up touching 7.3.x because by the time we were > ready to consider an upgrade from 7.2, 7.4 had been out for a while. > And we're now just starting to _think_ about 8.0 upgrades... > > I am running Debian/unstable on my desktop pretty happily; I just find > it painful that the "stable" release is so woefully out of date.
woody is a perfectly good samba/nfs/apache/dns server. Nothing wrong with the software in it. A few years ago that software was state of the art, but now you think it is unusable? Why? > It may well be that there is room for two systems: > > 1. Debian, as the "grand collector of package updates," and And the releasor of actually well tested systems for many architectures that will still be supported in 3 years. > 2. Ubuntu, as the folks that actually create release candidates on > some reasonably regular schedule. Releases that anyone but the server people would be interested in. I don't care if my desktop crashes once in a while. I don't want my server to do so. Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
