[Grml] Re: Debian Etch and grml
Marc Haber
mh+grml at zugschlus.de
Sat Jan 13 14:13:57 CET 2007
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 06:01:31PM -0700, s. keeling wrote:
> Incoming from Michael Prokop:
> > I do not agree with:
> >
> > > stable --> ancient and full of bugs, but patched
> > > testing --> less ancient, less bugs
> > > unstable --> current and basically stable* (grml)
>
> Nor do I. The Debian model is to produce stable with as few extant
> bugs possible. This is for the server market. Testing is just the
> next candidate for stable, once the release team signs off on it.
Right, agred.
> That's also the best place for a newbie to be.
I disagree with that. Testing might be broken once upon a time, and
when you're not able to fix this you don not belong on Testing.
Stable is the best place for a newbie to be. There is no Debian
distributions for not knowledgeable newbies who want to have the
latest software.
> Helping to test testing helps Debian produce sable.
Yes, but bug reports from newbies are seldomly useful. Which is no
offense to the newbie; isolating and reporting bugs is a form of art.
> For those more adventurous or less sensitive to potential bugs,
> unstable is available. Unstable is expected to be buggy; that's where
> new features and fixes are implemented.
Testing is expected to be buggy as well.
> That said, Debian's unstable is more stable than many distros'
> stable release.
Disagreed here. Especially in the period right after a stable release,
unstable's breakages can be horrible.
Greetings
Marc
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany | lose things." Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835
More information about the Grml
mailing list