[Grml] Re: Debian Etch and grml

Marc Haber mh+grml at zugschlus.de
Sat Jan 13 14:13:57 CET 2007

On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 06:01:31PM -0700, s. keeling wrote:
> Incoming from Michael Prokop:
> > I do not agree with:
> > 
> > > stable       --> ancient and full of bugs, but patched
> > > testing      --> less ancient, less bugs
> > > unstable     --> current and basically stable* (grml)
> Nor do I.  The Debian model is to produce stable with as few extant
> bugs possible.  This is for the server market.  Testing is just the
> next candidate for stable, once the release team signs off on it.

Right, agred.

> That's also the best place for a newbie to be.

I disagree with that. Testing might be broken once upon a time, and
when you're not able to fix this you don not belong on Testing.

Stable is the best place for a newbie to be. There is no Debian
distributions for not knowledgeable newbies who want to have the
latest software.

>   Helping to test testing helps Debian produce sable.

Yes, but bug reports from newbies are seldomly useful. Which is no
offense to the newbie; isolating and reporting bugs is a form of art.

> For those more adventurous or less sensitive to potential bugs,
> unstable is available.  Unstable is expected to be buggy; that's where
> new features and fixes are implemented.

Testing is expected to be buggy as well.

>   That said, Debian's unstable is more stable than many distros'
>   stable release.

Disagreed here. Especially in the period right after a stable release,
unstable's breakages can be horrible.


Marc Haber         | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany  |  lose things."    Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Nordisch by Nature |  How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835

More information about the Grml mailing list