On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 01:35:28AM +1000, James Mills wrote:
The question is:
Do we want to provide "latest bleeding edge" software that may have defects that haven't had time to be fixed yet ?
I think this would be heading down the path of Debian (which I always thought wasn't really a great idea). I guess I'm thinking of non-technical users here, whom may want to try "latest bleeding edge" stuff only to find it breaks.
Well, I think also that we should _not_ try to provide CVS or beta versions for the majority of our ports. Personally I believe it's better to have one good port of the latest stable version than providing many different versions with bugs or other problems. I think that the majority (containing me) doesn't want to use bleeding edge software with some serious bugs. Regards Viper