[arch-general] People that depend on Arch, etc deserve to die? - Allan McRae - Clarifications

[Loui Chang]

On Fri 23 Dec 2011 10:42 +0000, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
> On Friday 23 Dec 2011 05:32:25 Jonathan Vasquez wrote:
> > I wanted to know what was he trying to say? Is he saying that Arch and
> > other Arch-like distros aren't serious distros that aren't meant for
> > production? I mean I understand that Arch is rolling release and all
> > that, but it's packages are marked stable by their corresponding
> > upstreams.
> 
> I think the point is that it can be dangerous to use ArchLinux for
> critical applications, because there are occasional breakages during
> updates.  That's simply because Arch doesn't have a development cycle
> including a QA phase.  Distributions such as Debian can make certain
> guarantees about the stability of their software, because they only
> use older and thoroughly-tested software by default.

QA like when Debian broke SSL? I would rather trust Arch Linux for
critical applications.