@servant @RL_Dane Debian Stable is fine, if you are willing to get out-of-date (feature-wise, not security-wise) packages.
Debian Testing works OK and gets you more up-to-date packages. But if you want a distribution that uses up-to-date packages then Debian Testing isn't your best choice IMO.
I use Debian (Stable) on my Internet server. It works great.
@RL_Dane @golemwire @servant There's another line of arguments against Debian LTS model which could apply if right (disclaimer: not my text so I can't say) ;) https://www.unixsheikh.com/articles/the-delusions-of-debian.html
UnixSheikh is kind of an odd fellow, and I have seen him post pretty unsubstantiated stuff before, but this one is pretty solid, and the conclusion is sad.
Unfortunately, you can't have a half-decade LTS OS when software moves as fast as it does.
I still think Debian is viable if you switch to testing about a year after a stable release comes out. That's worked fairly well for me.
@RL_Dane @golemwire @servant Yeah well, I'm running Sid on my desktop computer, but Ubuntu LTS on my main laptop, which it's relatively recent yet, I may switch to the next LTS when it's out... Too late? At this point I'm just happy if everything works as expected with the less surprises, honestly. ;) And yes, our sheik may be just a bit odd sometimes, but I generally find their perspective interesting enough, may they be right or wrong (I'm not wise enough to discern anyway XD ).
@golemwire @servant
I've heard an argument that it's better to go rolling because not every security fix is known as a security fix. It could just be a bug fix which fixes an unknown security vulnerability.
Of course, the opposite could be true, too. The new version could introduce a new security vulnerability.