Debian needs a level between "testing" and "stable" [LWN.net]

Debian needs a level between "testing" and "stable"

Posted Nov 6, 2003 19:45 UTC (Thu) by dwheeler (subscriber, #1216)
In reply to: Time to move from Red Hat to Debian? by evgeny
Parent article: Time to move from Red Hat to Debian?

Debian has three levels: "Stable" (aka "obsolete"), "testing" ("needs to be tested"), and "unstable" ("just got the code patches"). Okay, those parenthetical comments are somewhat unfair, but I think they illustrate the problem. Many server users will find "stable" exactly what they want, but for many desktop users, "stable" is far too obsolete, yet "testing" hasn't undergone any significant system testing.

In my mind, Debian needs a level between "stable" and "testing"; let's call it "ready". This "ready" level would take the "testing" version and run the system through a number of regression tests and uses of the system as a whole (say for a more intensive 1-month period before release). This "ready" level would be released every 6-9 months, with patches as necessary.

I'm interested in Debian, but its poor initial installation approach is a problem. But even after I get it installed, it simply doesn't have a level I want. The old Red Hat Linux did do this. I think that the Debian community could do this without fundamentally destroying their community.

(Log in to post comments)

Debian needs a level between "testing" and "stable"

Posted Nov 6, 2003 22:25 UTC (Thu) by evgeny (subscriber, #774) [Link]

> Many server users will find "stable" exactly what they want, but for many
> desktop users, "stable" is far too obsolete

Well, I believe "stable" is far too obsolete also for many server uses - unless the server is supposed to do some very archaic tasks like serving static HTML content or providing SMB services to Win95 clients.

> In my mind, Debian needs a level between "stable" and "testing"; let's call
> it "ready". This "ready" level would take the "testing" version and run the
> system through a number of regression tests and uses of the system as a
> whole (say for a more intensive 1-month period before release). This
> "ready" level would be released every 6-9 months, with patches as necessary.

I don't know. Regression tests are a great thing anyway, but IMHO, it's the security policy (or a lack thereof) that diverges potential testers from "testing".

> I'm interested in Debian, but its poor initial installation approach is a problem.

Hmm. Actually, this is what bothered me the least. Of course, having started with SLS back in 1993, I'm not very picky about graphical installers ;-). In fact, I installed Debian on one of my servers that was running a Slackware distro without disturbing the services, in a chrooted environment. Then rebooted, noticed some sharp edges, rebooted back into slack, fixed the problems (again, in chroot), repeated it once or twice more, and was done. The total downtime was around 15 minutes or so.

> But even after I get it installed, it simply doesn't have a level I want.

Level of what? I personally got used to it quite quickly. Probably, because I met an old friend of mine - apt-get (I used it on RH boxes prior to it -;)).