Apparently you didn't understand me, so I'll try to clarify. We did not just "drop" the XFCE update into our repo. There was a period of testing first. It is regrettable that you had a problem with the upgrade, but there is no way that we could have known that would happen.
We have a set policy concerning the creation and release of ISOs. Changing from a quarterly release schedule to a new release with every update of any given DE would put an unwarranted amount of work onto our maintainers.
Did you get permission for that quote you used?
Testy am I? 
I speak plainly. I talk straight. When it comes to our team and the work they do, I'm a brick wall. I've worked with them and know what they put into this OS. I will say so in any situation where someone says they are not doing enough / not doing it right / etc. If that is being testy, then I'm testy.
Dear Neal ManBear,
Wow, how I've opened up a can of worms! That was not my intention.
First, to reply to your question "Did you get permission for that quote you used?", the answer is "no" and I received a gentle admonishment from the writer. I have apologized to the person. Frankly, it was just plain rude and thoughtless on my part to quote someone without asking permission first, especially when there is a slight "dig" at you (not mean-spirited though, I believe).
By the way, I personally don't think you are "testy" at all; at least you have not been to me. I believe that I have been unable to make myself clear to you.
Please let me repeat my suggestion and I hope that you and others will understand what I'm suggesting.
If you left major changes in the Testing Section until the new
set-by-you .iso release schedule, this, in my opinion, would cause no disruption or difficulties on anyone's part.
As I said, those of us who are not as sophisticated as some others would just get along using the older programs until such time, determined by you and the other administrators, as that new .iso disc can be released. This schedule would be solely determined by you. I am advocating
no changes at all to your disc release schedule.
Those who wish to try the new programs would merely access the Testing Section; they would have the benefit of the newer programs yet no new user would have any problems with installation, updating, etc.
When it is time for a new disc to be released, those programs formerly in the Testing Section, which have been determined to be good ones, could be incorporated into the disc and only then moved to the regular or Special section(s).
Thus, if someone were to have to reinstall the system (for whatever reason), he or she, having (hopefully) downloaded the new disc prior to doing the new install, would have some way to effect a clean re-installation of the system with no problems. Those persons would not have to use the older disc (as I did because it was all that was available).
If someone had to use an older disc prior to a new one being released (this would, of course, be the latest disc available, the one still offered on the main site), well, that would be all right too because the newer programs would still be in the Testing Section. These programs would not be moved out until a new disc is released on your normal schedule.
Do you see what I'm suggesting?
(If someone used an older disc
after a new one has been released, well, that's their problem!)
I feel badly about some poor devil who, say a couple of days ago, decided to try PCLOS Phoenix. He downloaded the disc, effected the updates (as is recommended), and then found that his system was unusable. What do you think such a person (if any) would think of PCLOS?
That's basically the gist of my discussion.
While I was not a new user, it happened to me.
Fortunately, I know how good PCLOS is - that's why I reported this situation here. (Of course when I started this discussion, I had no idea as to the cause.)
Had the new (in this case) Xfce 4.10 remained in the Testing Section until a new disc could be produced (on your schedule), this would not have occurred.
Those who wanted it could easily access it; those whose computer abilities are not so good could continue to use the older version (which, by the way, was fully satisfactory to me).
I fully realize that the fault was no one's. It is totally impossible to anticipate or test for every possible scenario.
I am offering just one suggestion such that this particular problem will not recur.
Sorry for the repetition but that's all I'm asking.
Lawrence
