On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 12:57 PM Dan Ritter <[email protected]> wrote: > > Andy Smith wrote: > > This whole thing just seems like the normal process of developing > > and packaging a distribution. Poor interactions are found, reported, > > hopefully will be fixed. But once again there's people trying to use > > this as a daily driver and having weird expectations. And then some > > sort of triggering around anything involving systemd. > > > > I feel like we see it more and more, these expectations about sid, > > and I don't understand why. > > There are people who have become invested in the idea that sid > is "stable enough" and have been told that it is comparable to a > rolling release model. > > They have been misinformed but seem resistant to correction.
A good reference that explains Stable, Testing, Unstable and Experimental is in the debian-reference at <https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/debian-reference.en.pdf>. >From p 42 (of 245), the closest thing to rolling releases appears to be Testing. The purpose of Testing is described as: Dynamic testing release after decent checks and short waits The reference also says: Only pure stable release with security updates provides the best stability. Running mostly stable release mixed with some packages from testing or unstable release is riskier than running pure unstable release for library version mismatch etc. If you really need the latest version of some programs under stable release, please use packages from stable-updates and backports (see Section 2.7.4) services. These services must be used with extra care. (I'm just pointing out the reference. It is not for the benefit of folks like AS and DSR. They already know these things). Jeff
