So if you use normal release (not tumbleweed) you are fixed to the package versions when suse was released, but you can go to OBS[1] where you can obtain latest version of software. Their 3sat dependency solver makes sure that dependencies are resolved correctly. Another interesting thing is that they group package upgrades into patches, with description and other details. You can for example issue zypper patch --have <cve> and instead everything that resolved specific vulnerability. I also love zypper ps showing which processes need to be restarted after the upgrade.
[1] http://software.opensuse.org which is like github for packages (it supports other distros as well) most packages are there in latest versions.
Debian stable is that distro in my case.
I agree that you shouldn't have to put up with an annoying bug or missing functionality until the next stable release; that's what the backports[1] system is meant to address. And when you cannot find what you're looking for in the backports repository, making your own is relatively simple[2].
The way I see it, the FreeBSD ethos is perfectly applicable in Linux land. It just requires a little bit of extra discipline on our part.
In (for example) Debian stable I have a very reliable system but any annoying bugs in end user software will remain for the next several years. But going to a rolling release distro could result in unexpected troubleshooting sessions while I actually had to be productive instead.
So there are drawbacks of going to a full rolling or a full stable distro and imho the FreeBSD model is the best balance between both extremes. Why isn't there a Linux distro like this?