Hi, From my point of view (newbie point of view) it's more natural use the default branch as my "target" codename. I mean, if I'm working on a package that I will upload to unstable I hope use debian/unstable branch for that. If I want to test or for any reason upload package to experimental (or backport) I will prefer use for that a debian/experimental for instance. Introducing the the debian/latest name, for me, it's more like the latest version, maybe on development before upload, but don't give me more information about the status of the package. I think could be more appropriate the name debian/dev, thinking on package into a Team. On 8/28/20 8:01 PM, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Hello, > > following the recent discussions of June and of the last days, I'm > proposing the changes below to DEP-14. Basically it replaces debian/master > with debian/latest for all the reasons already discussed earlier. And > it says that debian/unstable is preferred over debian/sid. > > And it also marks the proposal as ACCEPTED given that it has gained > traction over the years and that we didn't feel the need to make > significant change to it.
Attachment:
0xFA9DEC5DE11C63F1.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature