On 2010-06-15 6:57 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > Too bad the Debian Dovecot maintainer isn't 'The Flash' in getting > binaries uploaded. For i386 anyway. He had the AMD64 1.2.11 binary > uploaded to backports within a week IIRC. Took something like 2 weeks > IIRC before he got the i386 binary uploaded. If it weren't for the > fact that one of the bugs fixed was 'critical' for me (I actually > contributed to discovery), I'd probably not have cared. Some > debian-user list folks say I should simply be grateful we have > current Dovecot revs in backports period. I say if we didn't have > stuff in backports nobody would use Debian, as all the packages would > be 2 years out of date the moment the next stable is released...
This is precise reason I have never been inclined to try Debian other than once over 5 years ago (and why I like gentoo so much)... I do understand the argument, and it's apparently worked well for them, but imo the 'hard' line should be drawn more against the *system* (compiler, kernel, system tools, etc), and not so much the software that rides on top. I'm still running multiple gentoo servers that were originally installed 7 years ago, and are currently running mostly up to date versions of everything. I keep all of the *system* packages at 'stable', and applications at 'unstable', and it has worked flawlessly, with only a few minor bumps easily solved using google and/or the user forums. Yeah, 7 years is a long time hardware wise, but if it still works well and handles the load well, it fits my criteria of 'if it ain't broke don't fix it'. -- Best regards, Charles
