On 2010-06-16 7:52 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
The point is that waiting a few days or weeks after a release for the other guinea pigs to find the problems doesn't always guarantee you won't run into a bug, as I describe above.
True, of course... I think babies should be required to have 'There are *no* guarantees in life, with one possible exception: you will die some day.' stamped on their foreheads so they'd see it every time they looked in a mirror. ;)
1.2.10 had been out for quite some time, months IIRC, before Debian had a Lenny backport of 1.2.10 available which, I installed as soon as it hit the FTP. I found problems and reported them. This was many weeks or months after the general release of 1.2.10 IIRC.
Yes - iirc though, yours was a corner case for some reason?
I actually would prefer a rolling release system for some things. The problem as I see it with Debian is they support so darn many architectures the sheer weight of compiling all the packages and what not prevents them from doing anything stable quickly.
Gentoo supports just as many:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Linux_distributions#Architecture_...
Debian Stable has been averaging about 2 years between releases. Two years is a _LONG_ damn time to wait for a new rev of say, Dovecot.
I know... imo, a formal process for nominating certain critical applications - like postfix, dovecot, etc - for upgrading to stable would be a good thing. How often does a postfix update require an update to gcc or other system libs?
What's the ETA for the first stable release of Dovecot 2.0? Less than 6 months?
Only Timo knows, but just from past experience, yeah, I'd say less...
--
Best regards,
Charles