Re: apt sources.list
On Tue, Apr 25, 2000 at 03:19:44PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2000 at 08:57:26AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > > People who want to stick with slink even after potato is released shouldn't
> > > run apt-get upgrade, IMHO. Presuming we do our job properly and enable a
> > > smooth upgrade, that shouldn't be a problem.
> > I disagree. People may want to periodically run apt-get upgrade to keep
> > up-to-date on critical/security bug fixes but might not want to do a
> > major system upgrade without some preparation. Obviously that's not true
> > in all cases, but I think "shouldn't" is too strong here.
> You're forgetting that Debian doesn't support obsoleted stable releases.
> (note that I don't have a strong opinion on that, just stating the fact)
That makes my argument even stronger. When people keep running slink, one
day they will be reminded potato is stable anyway because it's removed
from the mirrors. At that point they are forced to *decide* whether they
switch to the new stable and change "slink" to "potato" in their
sources.list, or have sources.list refer to archive.debian.org.
By the time slink is actually removed from the mirrors, one can
reasonably expect users to know that potato is the current stable
release. One can not expect them to know about potato being the
current stable releas one minute after the links have changed on the
mirrors. And that is what having lines referring to stable implies.