On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 09:53:18PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 04:11:02PM -0500, stan wrote: > > Well, then shouldn't it allow "stable" to be released often enough that it > > acn be used in production> For instance how old are the prel modules, and > > devlopment environment in it? Ancinet by modern standards. > > We're trying, damnit.
Oh, also, it is far from obvious to me that perl 5.8.0 is yet stable enough for production use. For instance, its behaviour of interpreting input streams as UTF-8 in UTF-8 locales is being changed upstream in response to many bug reports (particularly from Red Hat 8.0 users, since that shipped with a UTF-8 locale as the default), and the new safe signals implementation has caused some problems which mean that the next upstream release will allow them to be turned off. I'm avoiding shipping anything later than perl 5.6.1 with our products at work, perl 5.6.1 is still formally supported, and it's a rare module that can't be built for it. So I think your example nicely demonstrates that current is not stable, and that lightning-fast integration of brand new upstream releases into Debian stable is not necessarily what people using Debian in production actually need. Version numbers are not everything. If you want something newer for some specific case, then you've always got the source. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
