I’m in the market to find a new distro that is similar enough to Fedora that switching won’t be as laborious as I’ve had it before. I keep hearing POP!_os is a good choice but I’m going to as the community what they think is good.
I’m in the market to find a new distro that is similar enough to Fedora that switching won’t be as laborious as I’ve had it before. I keep hearing POP!_os is a good choice but I’m going to as the community what they think is good.
While that’s true in theory, it’s still very common to run Debian Testing on a desktop in practice. For a user coming from Fedora, there would likely be culture shock from the dated packages in Stable. Using Stable with Flatpaks+Nix would be more usable, but OP’s experience does not sound like it would fit well with the effort/knowledge required for this solution.
I wouldn’t recommend Sid to a less-experienced user and I didn’t recommend Arch for a similar reason.
If you don’t recommend Sid, then Testing is out of the question. Testing is Sid, but less secure. Testing also has package freezing during the last stages of the release cycle. If you want a stable, and managed Debian, then the latest stable is the answer. If you want an cutting edge, semi-rolling release Debian, then you want Sid. Being in the middle has no advantages to the end user, and only invites complications. If something is broken in Testing, you have to wait for it to be fixed in Sid first, then trickle down to Testing at an absolute minimum. Why add an extra delay for nothing?
EDIT: offcial documentation https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-faq/choosing.en.html#s3.1.6