On 11/15/99, John Hasler scribbled about "Re: New release over due": > We are required to build and test our packages for unstable. > > However, it is a myth that you must upgrade to unstable before installing > any packages anything from unstable. >
I'm not opposed to running stable --- I'm doing it now. At some point I needed an up-to-date TeTeX for the somewhat specialized typesetting I do. Now, TeTeX is big. And complicated. And has lots of related packages with versioned interdependencies. And at that time, the Slink TeTeX was woefully out of date for my purposes. I would have preferred to stay with Slink, but the path of least resistance was to upgrade to Potato, over a 33.6 modem. Thankfully I only pay 5 cents per phone call and a flat monthly rate for internet. Is Potato's release over due? It's subjective. You can run it now, if you're willing to put up with x, y, and z. What I'd really like to see is more frequent incremental releases of Stable, bug/security fixes and updates only. Say once each month. Encourage developers to maintain Stable versions of their packages as long as possible, keeping them up-to-date in each incremental release. When it's not possible, that's life. But when it is possible, there's no good reason for not doing it that I can see. What's a developer's take on this? Thanks, Jesse -- Jesse Jacobsen, Pastor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Grace Lutheran Church (ELS) http://www.jvlnet.com/~jjacobsen/ Madison, Wisconsin GnuPG public key ID: 2E3EBF13