Hello everyone, I was reading the package signing discussion that was going on over at the [pacman-dev] mailing list http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2011-February/012483.html and Allan said the following: "I think I know every distribution using pacman as a package manager and (unless there is an enterprise level distro I am missing) if peoples lives depend on one of these distros, then I am sorry to say it but in my opinion they are stupid and deserve to die." I wanted to know what was he trying to say? Is he saying that Arch and other Arch-like distros aren't serious distros that aren't meant for production? I mean I understand that Arch is rolling release and all that, but it's packages are marked stable by their corresponding upstreams. What are your opinions about this? -- Jonathan Vasquez
