Edgy down?

[Bart Silverstrim]

Derek Broughton wrote:
> Bart Silverstrim wrote:
> 
>> Derek Broughton wrote:
> 
>>> On the subject of stability: of _course_ the newer releases aren't more
>>> stable.  They're _newer_.  Nobody expects "new" to be rock solid, but
>>> gutsy is, by now, solid, and hardy is pretty darn good.
>> I'm confused...if new becomes old, then old was once new, so how could
>> old be stable while new isn't?
>>
>> I expect new to fix problems with older versions, hence be more stable.
>> I expect all new features to cause problems. New versions with more new
>> features increases problems, I expect. Expectation does not always equal
>> reality.
> 
> OK, now you're confusing me.  You expect the new version to be more stable,
> but then again, you don't...

Confusion is good. It frees the mind to think outside the box as you try 
to unravel your confusion.

:-p

I expect new versions to fix some problems from previous versions and be 
more stable from the problems we're familiar with on the product. I also 
am not surprised if there are new problems in the process of adding 
features or trying to stamp out other bugs.

> Gutsy _is_ more stable than Hardy because it has had security and other
> updates, but no new features since release.  Hardy is necessarily less
> stable but will become more so as the remaining bugs are stomped.

Hardy should have also built up from Gutsy's bugfixes and lessons 
learned from Gutsy.

>> I fully expect that a good backup is better than holding one's breath
>> and not upgrading at all. 
> 
> "than" rather than "and"?
> 
> I think I agree :-)

No and...can't have your cake and eat it at the same time. Not without 
something really gross as the end product, anyway.