[vox-tech] Debian Woody Officially Released

[Rick Moen]

Matt, I'm going to have to be really brief, because I'm busy right now.

Quoting Matt Roper (matt@mattrope.com):
 
> I don't see how I "lack the foundation" when I actually run Debian's
> stable distribution, something which you have already admitted you do
> not.

Non-sequitur, as it assumes the only way one could understand how
Debian-stable works is to be running it at the moment.  Plainly, other
ways exist, such as reading Policy (I did), the Developer's Reference
(I did), and debian-devel (I do, spottily).  Not to mention having run
Debian-stable in the past (I did).

> Granted, I didn't include all the requirements for packages moving from
> sid to testing and the delay for most packages is actually 10 days, not
> 14, but the fact that testing usually receives a constant stream of
> updates is still valid, since stable does not.

My point was that your statement ("two weeks") is obsolete.  It _used_
to be that.  (You forgot to mention that the packages also needed to
auto-build without error on all CPU architectures.)  But the criteria
have been fine-tuned since the early days.  Jules's testingfaq document
is pretty current.  

Thus:  Please don't go around telling the old "two weeks" stuff to
people, as that has been untrue for quite some time.

> No, this is not incorrect.  What the Debian Developer's Reference does
> not mention is that almost all of the packages in proposed-updates are
> copies of packages that were placed on security.debian.org.  Technically
> bug fixes for very critical bugs can also go into proposed-updates, but
> this almost never happens (since stable almost never has critical bugs
> to begin with).

My point was that your statement "absolutely no updates/changes at
all *except* for security fixes" was incorrect as stated.  You get both
security fixes and non-security fixes on stable.

> Yes, the system is still stable, but it is now a completely different
> system in terms of what packages are available.  

Big deal.  It was a set of packages that met stable release criteria 
last week.  It's the same this week.  Time moves on; the development 
tracks do likewise.

>> I'm sorry, but your simile is lost on me:  I don't run legacy
>> proprietary systems.  You are perhaps confusing me with someone else.
> 
> I never said you ran such systems. [blah, blah]

Non-responsive.  You are wasting my time and yours, here.  

> You seemed to be implying that just because two operating systems had
> the same name and were equivalent in terms of stability that they were
> functionally equivalent as well. 

I'm sorry to hear about your reading problem.
 
> The fact is, there are no "obvious places" for a non-Debian user other
> than www.debian.org.

Your point?  

Anyone with a novice acquaintance of Google can find installation floppy
or CD images in short order.  And, I'm sorry, it doesn't take a genius
to look for such things without them needing to be staring you in the
face as a front-page hyperlink.  Or to find DebianPlanet, for heaven's
sake.  Again, here you are wasting your time and mine.

Anyhow, gotta go.

-- 
Cheers,     Founding member of the Hyphenation Society, a grassroots-based, 
Rick Moen   not-for-profit, locally-owned-and-operated, cooperatively-managed,
rick@linuxmafia.com     modern-American-English-usage-improvement association.