Dave Sherohman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: DS> On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 12:08:21AM -0800, Erik Steffl wrote: ES> what's the status of testing? I've noticed few remarks suggesting ES> that it's not ready yet, i.e. not at the same level as unstable ES> was. what's the status of testing and what is now the best choice ES> roughly equal to what unstable used to be? I understand that it's ES> gonna be testing later but is it later yet? DS> DS> Testing works great for me. IIRC, testing was originally created DS> as a snapshot of unstable, and has been updated by its normal DS> rules (2 weeks without problems, no unstable dependenceis, etc.) DS> since then, so I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be more DS> stable than unstable.
It was originally created as a snapshot of *stable*, and given the "woody" name. (This confused people who were tracking "woody", since the current version numbers jumped backwards when this happened.) But testing is up and running, and I've heard pretty good things about it so far. I'm not sure what you mean by it being "at the same level" as unstable. What unstable used to be is still unstable. -- David Maze [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mit.edu/~dmaze/ "Theoretical politics is interesting. Politicking should be illegal." -- Abra Mitchell
