Debian 10 “Buster” Released
As in all threads on Debian stable, I see criticisms that stable software is stale &#x2F; too old. That really misses the point: this is not a bug, it&#x27;s a feature of stable!<p>Stability doesn&#x27;t only mean &quot;lack of (big) bugs&quot;, it also mean that it&#x27;s dependable: it won&#x27;t change under you, and what is inside is well understood (including limitations). This require using mature enough software. In any non-trivial piece of software novelty will brings exciting new features but also regressions in some cases. There&#x27;s an inherent trade-off between freshness and stability in this sense.<p>Debian stable is made for stability in the full sense, like a Red Hat. If one prefers something more recent, but with more frequent changes, it&#x27;s fine. Either use a distro with more frequent releases (e.g.: regular Ubuntu or Fedora) or even a rolling one like Arch, of Debian testing (sort of) or unstable. There&#x27;s room for all of this, it&#x27;s just different trade-offs.<p>Lastly, as I&#x27;ve said elsewhere it&#x27;s possible to mix and match. One rarely needs the latest in all, and it&#x27;s possible to use stable as a base to avoid problems, and add fresh versions on top for only the software one care about. With the various languages package managers and flatpack&#x2F;snapd this is becoming very easy. For some it may be a better trade-off than moving to a rolling distro.