Re: getting rid of "testing"
On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 09:07:23PM +0000, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
Think again about why we have release names at all: Debian 1.0 never happened
because somebody packaged a pre-release semi-broken version as Debian 1.0 on
their CDs. At that point, Debian chose to also use codenames to refer to
releases in progress.
Raspbian have released "Buster" before we have. Codenames have not prevented
this happening.
For me, I like the idea of being able to use the codename as soon as it is
usable - that means that the distro tracks from unstable -> testing -> stable
without a change.
This would work with version numbers instead of code names.
Pinning to stable is a silly idea in /etc/apt/sources.list - as soon as a
release state changes - so if I have "stable" as my referent with 9.9,
there'll be chaos as Buster is released and a forced upgrade
This can be prevented by pinning to a version-number-name as well as code
names.
Having stable, testing, unstable as labels does mean I have to explain more to
colleagues but it also means that I can confidently tell my colleagues:
"Use the latest released stable Debian version if you want longer term
support"
They still have to resolve what that means, right? You don't want them putting
"stable" in pinning etc. for the reason you list above. So, they still have to
map stable → codename, and could just as easily map stable → version number.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.
Reply to: