On Wed, 25 May 2011 08:50:56 -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: > In <pan.2011.05.25.11.55...@gmail.com>, Camaleón wrote: >>Today's >>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? > <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). (...) Synonyms * (no longer in use): ancient, antiquated, antique, archaic, disused, neglected, old, old-fashioned, out of date *** "Obsolete" can fit. > I continued to use Lenny's Iceweasel and Chromium until about a month > before the Squeeze release, and both received maintenance releases > during the Lenny lifecycle. Sure, I'm still with Lenny and will keep it until Wheezy comes out. > Packages in Debian stable and oldstable might not be the most recently > available from upstream (and this is true of *most* packages, not just > web browsers), but they are generally well-maintained, quite usable, and > in-use (by me, if no one else.) Nobody said the opposite but that policy is not always the most convenient for some users. It's not a Debian's fault nor mainstream project's fault but users need to keep their browsers up-to-date and Mozilla, Google, Opera... all keep releasing new versions in a very short period which difficults packaging on non-rolling distributions. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.05.25.14.04...@gmail.com