Sarge is Now Frozen
JoeBuck writes "Steve Langasek has announced that Debian Sarge is now frozen. He produced a schedule that would lead to a Debian release at the end of May, though I would expect it to slip somewhat. I'm glad that the long wait for a Debian release will soon be over."
most of our team left Debian a while back. While its stability is still a strong point, many other distros are very proactive about putting out a stable, quality product these days without the rediculously long timeline....
K
I realize a lot of the posts here are in jest, but what's wrong with being a little slow on the release schedule? There hasn't been a release of Microsoft's desktop OS since 2001 (wow, comparing Debian to Windows XP - kind of like comparing __insert appropriate metaphor__).
As long as the developers are still committed to maintaining the distro, I think we should all be thankful that Debian is so conscientious in it's release policy.
Of course, I don't think Sarge will get all of the Debian desktop users back. I hope that community is fine with its role of being a server distro.
Open Source Sushi
With sarge being frozen, and the release nearing, I am finally glad i'll be able to move back to debian. Ubuntu is nice, but debian gives you much more control out of the box.
What is keeping me off of debian right now is the lack of Xorg, and the official support for the amd64 arch. Those were both things that were a "coming after sarge" deal, and now it looks like all that waiting will finally come to an end, I hope.
:(){
Paluminum.net
The original party line was that Debian's X team was waiting on a modularized X.Org source tree.
Debian's X team now is in a holding pattern until Sarge gets out, though I don't remember ever seeing this stated directly. For instance, in this message to dri-devel, Branden Robinson clarifies that Debian will package Xorg in the same fashion as XFree86 if the modular version isn't ready yet.
The Debian X Faq states, more or less, the same thing.
You don't see "No Xorg till Sarge releases" anywhere because none of the X team members are fortune tellers. I would imagine that NOW, with the freeze underway, they'd be happy to say it.
X.org is already stable in 11 architectures? Who did that?
Its relatively easy to do it just for i386 (It's the original target). As I know most of the efforts to port X to most architectures comes from Debian.
Ubuntu and others have i386, AMD64 and PowerPC basically. They make a great work. But doing it for 11 architectures and with the stability that Debian does...
I can't understand you. I think you are just to ignorant to understand.
I disagree. At this point, I find woody too old to even be usable on servers. What's outdated? Well, let's see: the MTA, whichever it may be; the web server, whichever web server you may prefer; the SNMP packages; the various FTP servers; OpenSSH; Kerberos; OpenAFS; PHP; perl; gcc; MySQL; Postgres. The list could go on. Not only are these packages out of date, but they're horribly out of date, in some cases multiple upstream stable releases behind. I run a number of services on woody boxes, and for most of these services I've had to backport packages or use something like backports.org for the important packages, often including their dependencies. Having to do this kind of thing sort of defeats the purpose of a "stable" release, IMO. Just because a machine is a "server" doesn't mean it doesn't need modern hardware support or up to date software. Maybe it's OK if it's just a simple little shell/static HTML server sitting in your closet for you and a few friends to use, but when you start trying to run an enterprise on Debian stable, you find it rather limiting.
noah