On 2004-06-25, Brian Astill penned: > > And Monique and others think this is simple???
When did I say that? If you're referring purely to the naming conventions, I agree that they're confusing, but no one's been able to come up with a better way to handle it. Usually, the people proposing new names are, well, new to the system, and the names they suggest are based on a faulty understanding of the characteristics of the various options. Also, the devs have made it clear that changing the names would be a major pain in the butt; I guess I believe that there are more valuable issues on which they can spend their time. There are no one-word descriptions of the characteristics of the three options, so any name is going to be slightly flawed. It seems to be human nature to assume that stable->testing->unstable is a spectrum from rock-solid to flakey, and that may be the case at any given time, but that's not what defines them. I guess you just have to read enough debates that finally the lightbulb goes on and you "get" it. That's what finally happened to me last year some time. -- monique -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
