Bug#1077764: Ruling request on os-release specification implementation
On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 at 19:08, Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Aug 03, 2024 at 04:15:36PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 at 21:29, Helmut Grohne <helmut@subdivi.de> wrote:
> > > > 2) Testing and unstable can continue to remain indistinguishable, and
> > > > both be erroneously identified as trixie
> > >
> > > Isn't there the third option of adhering to the os-release specification
> > > without making testing and unstable distinguishable? I did not see this
> > > ranked in your preference. Do you see it as even worse than the status
> > > quo?
> >
> > There isn't such option. Adhering to the specification means
> > identifying them separately, given they can be built separately, ran
> > separately, managed separately. So the option you are referring to is
> > for the opposite: _not_ adhering to the specification, and yes, that
> > is an option.
>
> For completion's sake:
>
> There is a third option of updating the os-release specification to
> declare that there is no relevant difference between distributions such
> as Debian's testing and unstable (for some definition of a class of
> distributions that would encompass the two) and that it is not necessary
> for os-release files to distinguish between them.
>
> I make no statement as to whether this is a good idea or not, but it is
> definitely a possibility.
That would make it contradictory with itself and everything else that
uses it, so it's not a change that would be acceptable.
Reply to: