The whole point of having a stable release is having programs
not changing their behaviour all the time. People not wanting
realiablity can always choose backports or testing/unstable.
That has nothing to do with servers, but with mainainablitity.
Having dozens or hundreds of computers with even more users
using everyone their favorite wm and other tools needs a
stable base. Having to update all at once might sound uglier,
but you can prepare people for that, make some scripts to
ease migration for the important packages. And only at that
time a "last week it worked, now it no longer works" means
having to test if a changed software-version is at fault
or something else. Having things not mega-freezed means
either having to watch for important changes (like, say,
no longer starting in default configuration) throughout
the whole year, or just throwing unusual stuff out of the
supported pre-installed pool of software.
So unless the old version is so buggy that it cannot be
used by people, or that it puts unbearable shame on the
author for releasing something like that before, I'd
strongly discuraging removing an old version just because
it is old. And even more a young version, just because
there are things that are newer from after the freeze.
Hochachtungsvoll,
Bernhard R. Link
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
