Debian GNU/Linux 4.0, codenamed Etch, had been due to arrive by December 4, 2006, but it's been delayed because some developers have 'deliberately' slowed down their work. According to a blog note by Andreas Barth, Debian developer & release manager, the delay has resulted because "Some people who used to do good work reduced their involvement drastically. There was nothing I could do about, and that happened way before I started full-time on release, but on the global picture that still counts."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-01-01
Yes, it might make sense to rename "stable" as "server," "testing" as "desktop," and "unstable" as "development."
Debian could also prepare snapshots of "testing" say, once in every six months, and spend some time fixing any broken dependencies in those snapshots, and then release them under the name "Debian desktop release" or something like that. They could be a bit more lax with the bug-fixing of those "desktop releases," and they could still concentrate their main efforts in preparing the less frequent and higher quality "server releases."
In fact, I've seen some Debian Developers suggesting special desktop-oriented Debian releases on the mailing lists. But such ideas take a lot of hard work before they can become reality, and I'm not sure if there exists enough interest among the DDs to push the idea forward. Things are already pretty good as they are in the Debian land and there's the old UNIX wisdom: "If it ain't broken, don't try to fix it."
Member since:2006-01-10
Member since:
2006-07-13
well you excellently explained why the naming scheme doesn't cut it.
"it's called stable because there are no upgraded packages".
people don't get such things. you know how the naming is made, I know, but my neighbor thinks "stable" is something that doesn't crash. ok, so he installs and finds all is old, very old, compared to other distributions that are stable too but containt current software.
now it's up to your imagination why the onther naming schemes don't fit too well either.
yo start with unstable. what's the first word youthink of ? "my computer is unstable" etc.
that's why i said that it should be rethinked and not given a name that doesn't tell what it exactly is.
stable is no more stable as RH or SLES, openSUSE etc. However the latter have packages .... you see?