Trackin' stable vs. releases
Alan DuBoff <aland@SoftOrchestra.com>
Thu, 9 May 2002 20:14:11 -0700
There was an interesting topic that Rick brought up at Cafe Borrones last
night, that being what do releases really matter if you're trackin' stable?
This is certainly an interesting topic, and I'm sure that many people do
track stable, to eventually get the new release when it comes out, but I find
myself at some point in the cycle, moving to unstable for various reasons to
do with the newer software that I prefer to be using is on unstable.
In theory, the only thing that really changes are the actual install CDs when
a new release comes out and one could always do a dist-upgrade and take their
entire system to a different release other than the media used for install.
In theory, because some of us have found that it doesn't work so cleanly all
of the time, often giving an abrupt error during the actual upgrade.
As I have pointed out, for me there is usually software that drives my
decision to move to unstable, and in the case of woody, I'll stick on stable
for quite a while after woody is released. However, it was software like
XFree86 4.x, Mozilla, and even <gasp> Emacs 21.1 that make being on unstable
satisfying for me at some point in the cycle.
I thought this might make a better topic rather than having a wee-wee contest
over invariant sections in licensing...or at least compliment it...
Software Orchestration, Inc.
GPG: 1024D/B7A9EBEE 5E00 57CD 5336 5E0B 288B 4126 0D49 0D99 B7A9 EBEE