Is 3.8.12 stable or beta?

In Distrowatch the latest version for Elive is 3.8.12 and it says that it is "fixed" release after 3.0.4.
Is 3.8.12 stable or beta or developers' version? If it is stable how can one get the download link?

Hi @muhibbij and welcome to the forum :slight_smile:

The versions listed in distrowatch are the versions the elive website announced in their news (even if there's updated downloads, only the announced versions are counted as valid)

I'm not sure about what they said of the 3.8.12 stability, it can be a confused sentence from the news (on which we say that these versions are extremely stable). But in short, these are the beta versions which are pretty new, very featured, and extremely stable, they are also a very different desktop experience than the stable version so this may be unexpected for someone who wants to upgrade :slight_smile:

In any case, if you want to download the last version I suggest you to wait 2-3 more days that the version 3.8.14 is going to be uploaded including a good amount of improvements, and just make sure you are subscribed to the elive newsletters in order to get these downloads :wink:

1 Like

3.8.12 is very stable but it is a beta version, the most stable version we offer is 3.0.6 (on the website is labelled as Stable)...the stable version is best if you are new because it's the most friendly

By other side if you need new drivers and software 3.0.6 is debian wheezy based (shudder) so if you want Buster you'll need the beta vesion

(edit: just moved to a slightly more concise title :slight_smile:)


Stable versus Beta are clearly very confusing terms for people not well acquainted with Elive, and they're right ..... I wonder how many are put off by a "Beta" tag?
Maybe we should consider using the E17 (or 16, 24) prefix more often or stick to the given names like Gem or Topaz but Stable shouldn't be a name. :shocked:


thats not really a problem for these kind of users, they search a good experience and easy to use, so the "labelled stable" is perfect for that, advanced users are the ones brave ones that are couraged to use / try the beta versions and they will find that the system is extremely rock solid :slight_smile: , so in any case, it is well balanced

mmh i dont think so, i mean, they are entirely different things, the proof is the actual beta and stable versions, both of them are very stable, but they have a very different user experience / desktop, which is more correct to use the E16 / E17 / E23 concepts for that (in fact, the boot of the beta versions already includes a description to them, before the graphical system starts)

so in short i dont think anything is wrong, a codename is just a codename, an official website/page is meant to give simple and needed information, and other deeper places like this forum or the source codes to include a deeper / advanced information :thinking:

so in any case, E* is a different experience, but the desktop type used is in any case explained on the download pages (maybe not in the stable one, not needed, since that desktop experience is just very good)

If you read the initial post of this thread you should realize that's bollocks.

Stable is a description not a name and Beta is by definition unstable, it is not a replacement for "a different desktop experience".
You are a fine developer|coder|designer|artist but definitely not a good copy-writer.... at least not in English. :ohmygod:

As you might now I found the naming quite confusing. Beta sounds like...well beta, as if it’s a beta version ie not a release candidate. I agree that using the E version would be a lot better. I was initially put off by the beta name for the reasons mentioned above. So Elive-e16 in my opinion would be a more ‘sane’ name for what we call beta. IMHO calling a version stable, suggests beta isn’t stable. It’s really quite confusing for new users. I understand the pita renaming might be, but I think it would be beneficial in the long term, and for clarity for new users.


I think we are talking about the same thing, the website is wrong by saying it "beta" and its actual state is "a different user experience in a very stable system" (but the website says that is a beta system, just like what you are saying, and I agree totally with that :slight_smile: )

it is in fact considered beta on the website just because the E16 was temporary before to switch to a future well made E24 (in other words, it is meant to be not finished), but the actual result is a very stable and usable system that should not be named beta, so yes we are agreeing with all said

I agree with @hippytaff too