Test -- Where have all the horses gone?

[Collins Richey]

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 15:46:00 -0500, David Bandel <david.bandel at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 12:58:11 -0500 (EST), Net Llama!
> 
> 
> <netllama at linux-sxs.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 17 Nov 2004, Michael Hipp wrote:
> > > Net Llama! wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 17 Nov 2004, Michael Hipp wrote:
> > >
> > > >>(Your comments and the recent announcement about VA/Sourceforge going
> > > >>FC2 from Debian has got me pondering again.)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > AFAIK, its just sf.net that is moving to Fedora from Debian.  I suppose i
> > > > should ask Uriah (the sr sysadmin for sf.net) why they made the switch,
> > > > cause i know he used to be a pretty hardcore debian guy.
> > >
> > > It would be informative to hear about the thought process behind the
> > > switch as I'm sure it wasn't made lightly. The news blurb I read a
> > > couple of weeks ago really didn't say much.
> >
> > OK, i talked to uriah.  In a nutshell they got sick of waiting for debian
> > to do a major release, and they needed a distro that released early &
> > often & predictably.  The problem with waiting for debian is that when
> > they did release, since it was so long since the last major release, a ton
> > of stuff on the servers were broken (there were 3 glibc changes, at least
> > 2 gcc changes, and massive amounts of other 'lesser' changes).
> >
> 
> Well, this is true if and only if you used exclusively stable.  I use
> testing and have no such problems.  Now unstable is just that, but I
> find testing to be sufficiently bleeding edge to keep up, but not so
> bleednig edge as to have stuff constantly borken.
> 
> I'd say testing is a good tradeoff.
> 

I'd say a better name for debian stable is "relic."

-- 
 Collins