Yup it is QA for Arch's model which is what I was going to yell you when I started reading your response ;).
It depends how you implement QA. On Dec 23, 2011 4:31 PM, "Heiko Baums" <li...@baums-on-web.de> wrote: > Am Fri, 23 Dec 2011 15:52:13 -0500 > schrieb Jonathan Vasquez <jvasquez1...@gmail.com>: > > > Let's not forget Loui, We are all human and make mistakes. A QA > > process is definitely a good thing. > > Is QA the thing what makes Debian so bleeding edge? *SCNR* > > I haven't had any stability issues with Arch Linux, yet, neither with > Gentoo. And in these very rare cases in which something unforeseen > happens with an update it can easily be fixed by either downgrading or > waiting a few days for an update which fixes the issue. Or it can be > fixed or worked around in other ways. > > So Arch Linux is absolutely stable and bleeding edge in my opinion and > can indeed be used in a production environment. > > And, btw., isn't the testing done by the devs in the git tree and in > [testing] not QA? > > Heiko >
