I have done a search but could not find a poll on this.
So, what are you using? Woody, Sarge or Sid?
Of course it is nice of you to post the usage of your boxes, too

Testing, of course

Have been bitten by bleeding-edge software before, so a little caution has crept in.

unstable after years of running Stable

Testing.

I kinda like bleeding edge software, but I actually have to use my machine everyday so stability is an issue. Thus, testing it is.

Use stable for a webserver and testing on 3 other boxes used on a daily basis

Like TigerOC, i use testing as desktop and stable on most servers. Only if the server requires a little bit of bleeding edge software i put testing on it too.

Unstable costs me too much maintenance and patience. I can't afford something to be broken for few days on a production machine.... I also don't have time to fix stuff even if it is simple.

Lots of testers run unstable and lots of newbies too. For some newbies, they just wonder how to fix problems or when it is gonna be fixed in Debian : have a look at the mailing lists and bugs lists....

Do you know about a tool called "apt-listbugs" ? It's one of the most usefull packages I have installed
lately.
After you install it, The tool will auto-run and download bug reports for the package(s) you are trying to
upgrade/install. It lists each bug along with its severity and prompts you if you want to go ahead with
the installation.
I switched from Testing to unstable 2 months ago though .

Debian Unstable is the desktop of my choice and apt-listbugs has saved me from any serious setbacks so far. But cancelling installations that contain packages apt-listbugs reports to be buggy and checking from time to time if the bugs have already been fixed is a bit toilsome. Maybe using Testing would be easier, but even if I decided to change to Testing, I'd still use apt-listbugs.

My main reason for using Unstable is that Linux desktop applications keep currently developing at fast pace. But I think I could be happy using the versions that are now in Testing, so I've considered the possibility of switching from Unstable to Testing. Stability and ease of maintenance are not only important for servers, they are also appreciated on the desktop. Luckily I've found Debian that can provide both.

OneManArmy - cheers for the apt-listbugs suggestion. Will have a play with it under Testing, and take it from there

(I use Debian for work, so it needs to be reasonably stable, unfortunately.)

mj

testing on my laptop, used mandrake for a while then moved to debian, I don't use unstable because I don't want to mess up my school

testing. just as stable as any other distro and offers newer packages than stable. enough said!

Testing (2 machines)
bleeding-edge software without problems

Primarily a Slacker, but have been keeping a Debian testing partition. Don't want bleeding edge, just sort of seeping a bit.

A mixture of Testing + Unstable along with apt-listbugs installed.

rrs

personally I think Debian stable releases are very slow, so I use testing whenever I feel like giving Debian a spin.