On 7/24/06, Steve Huff <shuff at vecna.org> wrote: > > > On Jul 24, 2006, at 6:03 PM, Eduardo Grosclaude wrote: > > > It is not a method for anything, nor an equation, it is just a > > measurement. I don't pretend those facts to be a useful measure to > > reasonably conclude anything. Of course you still need to take into > > account several other measurements to fit into any theory... > > hm, perhaps "stable" is a poorly-chosen word, then. the word > "stable" is somewhat emotionally loaded among system administrators, > and i suspect many people automatically think "stable==good", and so > if their chosen distro performs poorly according to your "stability" > metric, they may be inclined to attack your metric or you. > > my first thought was that your metric did not seem a particularly > useful one; then i realized that if you were collecting it, you > probably had some use for it, but it was difficult for me to get over > the choice of word. > > -steve > I agree :) Please let's s/stability/volume of updates/g and start it all over again :) Cheers to all -- Eduardo Grosclaude Universidad Nacional del Comahue Neuquen, Argentina -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060724/c465bb6f/attachment-0005.html>