Gentlefolk: The discussion of `stable' vs. `etch' vs. `lenny' vs. ... got me to thinking. Is there any reason to offer `stable' as an entry in sources.list? Its drawback seems to be:
o Every so often `stable' whacks you with about
seventeen million updates, with the chance that you'll
be left dead in the water.
Using the name (`sarge', e.g.) has the drawback that:
o Eventually a named distro will drop off the end of the
world, and get no more security updates.
OTOH, `unstable' is a necessary warning sign: Here be
dragons. Someone starting with Debian needs to know that
unstable has more surprises. (Though, in my experience,
they're mostly like the ones you find in a box of Cracker
Jacks.)
So, my modest suggestion is that `stable' as a name
should be eradicated. Roughly no downside, only closer
adherence to the principle of least astonishment.
[Runs for blast shelter...]
--
Best wishes,
Max Hyre
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
