On Mon, 2006-07-24 at 12:45 -0300, Eduardo Grosclaude wrote:
Thank you for your point, on which I wholly agree, but I was taking "stability" as "a measure of velocity in change" of a system's components-- here reflected in a shorter or longer life cycle for each version.
Seems like a bad concept - if something is broken in the initial release you really do want the change that fixes it...
Er... I'm back from Wikipedia, and found (cough) no traces of "stability" as the proper word for what I meant, but come on, think Debian stable/unstable, that stuff :S
This is probably spelled out somewhere in the 'upstream version' documentation, but security-related fixes are made available as needed and bugfix updates are batched infrequently. Version-level application updates are almost never done. I consider it the 'right' amount of stability for servers where the programs have been feature-complete for years but it is getting on the old side for desktop apps now.