Hi, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
>> Probably. On the other hand, I think that the coverage we get from testing
>> is a lot higher than from unstable, by the simple fact that more people
>> risk using testing as their day-to-day system. (I wouldn't dream of
>> installing Unstable on my "Real Work" system. Testing? No problem.)
>
> Interesting idea. The increased coverage most likely leads to more problems
> being found, which means more time is needed to fix them.
It unfortunately also leads to more time for people to release, and/or
upload to unstable, shiny new versions of their favorite packages.
> In the end, this leads to a better release.
Hopefully. ;-)
--
Matthias Urlichs | {M:U} IT Design @ m-u-it.de | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
