Hi, Le 12/10/10 15:55, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso a écrit : [standard rambling about how freeze slows down unstable development]
I know it's pretty useless to participate in this sort of conversation, but conversation is not about being useful, right? > unstable again is again used as it should be The point is that not everybody agrees about how unstable *should* be used (and the available documentation reflects a historical state of mind which may not be current anymore). Your stand is "unstable is for always getting the latest release of everything". Others see unstable as the development platform for the next stable Debian release. Outside of freeze periods, the two point-of-views yield the same result: latest upstream tarball, active packaging effort. During freeze, they don't: the former would still want the latest upstream, while the latter dictates to continue active package development on a frozen upstream tarball. I personally consider that it is not necessary for Debian unstable to always have the latest version of everything, because Debian's strength lays in the robustness of stable and the commitment to support it for several years. I want the best stable possible with the best backports possible. When I want the very latest of anything, I go directly to the upstream website and download binaries or the source. Other distributions are released more often than Debian and may well be a better choice for people who simply like (or need) to upgrade their system every 6 months. Most of the time, except for very specialized software, I'm very happy to lag behind by 6 months or even 2 years. Regards, Thibaut. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
