Re: apt sources.list
On Tue, Apr 25, 2000 at 02:39:00PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> I don't. We are not talking about sudden silent upgrade from slink to
> potato. It is rather evident by the huge number of packages to upgrade,
> the large list of 'new' packages, and the various other little signs.
But it is just *one* <enter> away. Or if you're using apt-get -y upgrade,
(think crontab), not even that...
> All you are doing is replacing this rather nice sign with a hard to
> understand (404 File not found http://..../slink/...)
It's not harder to understand a `<everything> not found' message than to
understand a `<everything> will be upgraded' message. ITYM it is harder to
> I guarentee the latter will result in lots of 'Why is the FTP archive
> broken?' mails to email@example.com :P
And doing the semi-full upgrade to the new stable distro will result in
similar messages, too, e.g. "Why did you force me to get 400MB over
modem?!". You can't win ;)
> If someone is running a system where it is critical to schedual downtime,
> notify users, whatever, then I assert the following
> 1) This person will understand our release process
Not neccesarily completely. Besides, there aren't quite a lot of accessible
docs explaining it.
Point 3) depends on 1). :)
> 2) This person will be able to decide on their own what setting in
> sources.list is right for them
Such people won't care what's in the default sources.list, anyway.
Anyway, the "backbone" issue is whether we want the generic user to upgrade
to the next stable the moment it comes out, or just to get the updates to
the stable release he is using ATM. I'm not quite sure the former is good
to be a default setting, although the system is set up already in a way to
enable it and disable the former. Do as you wish, I'm not in the mood for
another pointless flamewar...
Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification