zlacker

Arch has been handling minor releases on Chromium just fine. If Debian is having issues, it is most likely with them trying to backport fixes into antiquated code bases.

>>encryp+(OP)
If a year old is considered antiquated, we have some major problems in this world.

And it's kinda my whole point: code that can only be consumed wholesale as shipped might technically be open source, but if backporting fixes to a year old version is nigh on impossible, is it truly open source in practice?

>>encryp+(OP)
But arch is a rolling distro.

Debian has a release model for a reason and it's their raison d'etre. Of course they don't want to compromise that.

Considering the amount of other distros that use them as a base they're providing something that people want.

>>gspr+3d1
Yes it is. That is like saying because it doesn't run on an Atari that it isn't truly open source.

>>encryp+gn1
No it's not. The Atari isn't one year old. Come on man, from your logic you might as well say that a one year old car should be fed hay since it's practically a horse.

>>gspr+Da2
Debian stable is using components often several years old, not just a year.

>>encryp+ak3
Some parts of the system evolve faster than others. I am glad for Debian's relatively conservative policy for all my servers, but I want an evergreen browser on my desktop.