On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 02:43:42PM +0200, Neo wrote: > Hi Colin, > > so, sumarizing for my situation: it's no use tracking a > unstable 'release' because it just isn't that: a release, and never > will be.
Different people put different values on these things. My laptop runs unstable quite happily; admittedly that's because I need that for Debian development, but it gives me minimum time from bug-fix to installation. My desktop at work runs testing because it's within a fairly safe corporate network so I don't worry too much about the lack of quick security updates, and I wanted some things that weren't in stable. My server at home runs stable because I don't want it to break, I don't want to spend too much time configuring and reconfiguring it, and it has to be secure. > Then why not take the logical step, pick a kernel release > (or combination of linux/hurd/*bsd releases), put a name on it, > put it in testing and let it grow to a stable release? This name > sid just confuses things, in my humble opinion. Hm? Kernel releases are only a very small part of the development of the Debian distribution. They aren't suitable for this purpose. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
