Testing or Sid?

[fab161]

Hello there,

as Bullseye keeps getting older and older I consider both Sid as well as Testing for a new installation: Testing seems like a nice compromise to me, as its slightly slower rolling nature might come in handy for me at the moment.

In the past I've mostly used Sid and Stable; I kind of hope that Testing could suite me as a desktop user well, being a bit more relaxing than Sid but also more up to date compared to Stable.

However, I've read that Testing would have the "worst security update speed" (see Debian Wiki and the Debian documentation), because of the 2-10 day migration delay from unstable that could also affect security patches. Is that a concerning issue for a desktop system?
Do you use Testing? How do you handle this situation?

By the way, I'm planning to use said installation for some time on a rolling branch, not just through the freeze for Debian Bookworm.

Best regards,
Fabian

[None1975]

Just check this https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debi ... tml#s3.1.5, section "3.1.5. Could you tell me whether to install stable, testing or unstable?".

[wizard10000]

I personally prefer Unstable but Testing is slightly more stable and offers less chance of breakage if someone is not paying attention during updates

I don't think anybody but OP can determine whether slower security updates are an acceptable risk, though.