> Debian/sid has its freeze phase Correct me if I'm wrong (I don't think this would have changed), but Debian/testing has a freeze phase, and what you say is t

> Debian/sid has its freeze phase Correct me if I'm wrong (I don't think this would have changed), but Debian/testing has a freeze phase, and what you say is true about testing. I don't recommend Debian/testing to anyone because the experience is not consistent, and it does not get fixed packages as fast as sid. (If a package is broken in testing, it's because it has somehow made it through the waiting period without anybody noticing that bugs were present. It may then likely remain broken until all the outstanding bugs are fixed and no new bugs are reported for something like two weeks, which is why it historically can sometimes get so bad as you suggest.) But sid never does have a freeze phase, it's always accepting packages. As long as they don't have a bug reported against them in something like two weeks while they're sitting in experimental, or something? (It's been a while since I've reviewed the rules, and they might have changed since then.) I think the bar to get your package accepted in sid is much lower than in testing. But there is still a bar, and that's why the quality is actually very consistently high. (Maybe not as high as stable, but stable distros are for production systems, not for developer workstations IMHO.) The only reason to use "testing" is if you yourself are a developer who is actually building software to release concurrently with (and run on) the next stable release.