As the title and the website say, I’m currently making a distro with the goal that you don’t have to compromise between ease of use + safety and bleeding-edge + performance optimizations.
As I will likely be able to publish the 0.0.1 source code to the GitHub link and the ISO to the website sometime next week, I would like people to be aware of my project so I can have some feedback for further improvements when I release the first version. I have not posted this anywhere else yet, as I value the opinion of this community more than Reddit or whatever.
If you have any questions or any criticism, please voice it, I would love to hear it, good or bad, in the end I want to make a proper OS. (I’ll go to bed now so expect replies to take a few hours from posting.)
Stable vs Unstable does not mean anything to do with bugginess or prone to breakage.
It literally just means package version changes.
Stable meaning packages update slowly and only minor versions or security.
Unstable means packages update frequently including major versions
Inherently rolling releases are unstable.
My personal experience too is that Arch has been the best distro for lack of bugs and issues on my machines than Fedora or Debian etc.
It would be great if that’s how the words were actually used, but in most discussions I’ve seen it is certainly not the case. Also, when talking to new users, they are supposed to magically understand and know the word is used in a niche way in this context? It certainly won’t be what they take from it when hearing or reading it.
That’s what we have rolling or bleeding edge for. Sure, unstable can mean that when used within the same project/context. So having different releases be stable and unstable for the same thing, but across projects/distros that’s just confusing, especially for new people. Yes I’m aware of the historic reasons and the roots in software development, but I’d argue it isn’t helpful to convey the practical reality of the differences.
I don’t disagree that it causes confusion and that people conflate the two meanings especially for those unaware of what it is supposed to mean.
And inherently as well being an unstable distro as far as package updates goes likely leads to it being “unstable” in day to day use as far as bugs etc obviously goes hand in hand which further conflates the meaning.
This is why we should call it “bleeding edge” rather than “unstable” it’s a much more accurate name and it exemplifies the advantages (albeit leaving out the (minor) disadvantages)