> Unstable branch - absolute latest software here... > Rolling unstable - Still risky but not on the lines of unstable > Rolling stable - everyday use and very stable
May I add my bit of unrequested thoughts? This discussion seems to only differentiate between "degrees of unstability and risks", but nothing about "user roles". IMHO, a distro is not only about "risk vs. features", but also about what people are expecting from it. I could imagine for user roles: "rolling-user" branch: -- KDE4, GNOME3, XFCE, LibreOffice, Firefox/Thunderbird, Chromium are always kept to the latest _stable_ (not development) version; -- other applications might be kept (or not) to the latest _stable_ (not development) version; -- other libraries are to be upgraded _only_ if they're required by newer applications. "rolling-user-risky" branch: -- KDE4, GNOME3, XFCE, LibreOffice, Firefox/Thunderbird, Chromium are always kept to the latest _development_/_unstable_ version; -- other applications might be kept to the latest _development_/_unstable_ version, otherwise most are kept to the latest _stable_ version; -- other libraries are to be upgraded _only_ as they're required by newer applications. "rolling-developer" branch: -- everything updated to the latest _development_/_unstable_ versions of everything. Does this make any sense? Best regards, R-C (aka Beranger with an e acute)
