Dont you think there is a healthy line between booth?
I would not whant anyone using old ass versions with old ass bugs.
Its also bad for new users, who expect software to be remotly up to date.
Debian stable is for servers or other applications where security and predictability are paramount. For that application I absolutely do not want a lot package churn. Quite the opposite.
Meanwhile Sid provides a rolling release experience that in practice is every bit as stable as any other rolling release distro.
And if I have something running stable and I really need to pull in the latest of something, I can always mix and match.
What makes Debian unique is that it offers a spectrum of options for different use cases and then lets me choose.
If you don’t want that, fine, don’t use Debian. But for a lot of us, we choose Debian because of how it’s managed, not in spite of it.
There is a fine line between stable and outdated. Some debian pakages are like 2 years out of date. I just cant handle that on a desktop.
So don’t run stable on a desktop? If you want a bleeding edge rolling release, that’s what sid is for.
Dont you think there is a healthy line between booth? I would not whant anyone using old ass versions with old ass bugs. Its also bad for new users, who expect software to be remotly up to date.
For the target users of Debian stable? No.
Debian stable is for servers or other applications where security and predictability are paramount. For that application I absolutely do not want a lot package churn. Quite the opposite.
Meanwhile Sid provides a rolling release experience that in practice is every bit as stable as any other rolling release distro.
And if I have something running stable and I really need to pull in the latest of something, I can always mix and match.
What makes Debian unique is that it offers a spectrum of options for different use cases and then lets me choose.
If you don’t want that, fine, don’t use Debian. But for a lot of us, we choose Debian because of how it’s managed, not in spite of it.