Testing doesn't get timely security updates. It's not for serious people with production systems. It shouldn't even be a debate.

▲

bayindirh 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I believe I need to reiterate: Stable is for servers, testing is for desktops if you're not directly exposed to internet.

Again. Stable is for servers, testing is for personal use.

I never argued otherwise, ever.

▲

krzyk 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Google disagrees - https://itsfoss.com/goobuntu-glinux-google/

	▲	bayindirh 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Debian security team used to offer support for testing, but as the distro grew and attack surface increased, that was dropped. However, security incidents are patched in unstable as well and they float up to testing relatively quickly (for a desktop system, anyway). When things freeze, security updates directly land on testing as a fixup polish. However, while Testing is "relatively secure", it's never "Server secure". I'd never use testing or testing packages in stable or any server for that matter.
	▲	load-bearing 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[dead]

▲

pessimizer 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The comment you're replying to makes clear that they're not using it on servers. I do the same thing (testing on my laptop(s), stable on my servers); you just have to commit to keeping track of what's going on and manually patch if you think that it's necessary.

I have to add that for me, testing definitely breaks stuff sometimes. Nothing beyond my ability to fix, though. Nothing beyond anyone's ability now that AI is around.

	▲	bayindirh 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> I have to add that for me, testing definitely breaks stuff sometimes. That's interesting, can you give an example? Asking as a curious Debian user.