Views from an Red Hat -> Ubuntu -> Fedora migrator

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 12:08:19PM -0400, Peter King wrote:
> This baffles me. Why accept any half-bakedness for any time at all, in your
> working environment? 
> 
> Debian stable is exactly that, rock-solid (if unexciting and not up-to-date),
> and Debian Testing, which I ran for years, is more solid than these "timed
> release" distros. Now I prefer Gentoo, which is not only a very solid stable
> rolling-release, but which is transparent all the way through (not only the
> package management system but the software itself is all open to inspection,
> fiddling, and recompiling). If I want to risk more bleeding-edge software I
> can always unmask packages, or use Gentoo unstable, or just write a shell
> script (an ebuild) and compile them myself; when things break I know who
> broke them, and often why they broke.
> 
> But never mind *which* distro we're talking about. Why should anyone put up
> with half-bakedness forced on them as a consequence of a release schedule?
> That's what the Other OSes do -- OSX and Windows -- and there it's part of
> the whole package, take it or leave it. Well, I left it, and I'm not going
> to take it again.

I certainly don't want half-bakedness under the name of a stable release.
To me that is a contradiction.

-- 
Len Sorensen
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists