From: Ron Farrer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Slink is called `stable' for a reason. It's not obsolete > > for people who just want a stable distribution. > > > > Of course, it is obsolete for people who want a nice GNOME > > (or especially KDE) environment, or those who own Athlons or other > > hardware the kernel provides, etc, etc. > > > > It seems that the number of those to whom slink is useful > > outweighs the number of those to whom it isn't. > > I disagree! (surprise ;) I personally know of about ~4 people who were > turned away from slink because GNOME and KDE were so OLD. I personally > got around this by running potato (unstable then), but most > people don't WANT to run unstable!
I'd argue that the issue is availability on CD. The biggest turn-off I can see (particularly for people for whom net bandwidth is not a free resource) is the "install stable and then upgrade" idea. Made worse by cases where hardware is not supported on slink. The person who reported being at a LUG where he couldn't install Debian on someone's machine when the latest RH CD installed fine is a good example. The person who owned that machine ended up with RH. And IMHO, debian-unstable would have probably been better. Who lost out? Who cares? Paul.
