Dear Fellows, On 12/20/24 14:49, Justin B Rye wrote: > Holger Levsen wrote: >> Justin B Rye wrote: ... snip ... >> Suite is very commonly used to describe the different, aehm, suites of >> Debian. > > Indeed, that's how it got in the Glossary! > >> https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/developers-reference.en.html >> mentions suites 21 times, mostly in this sense. Since 'Suite' has a historical value, that remained unopposed for some time, we can very easily adopt it going forward. > Yes; DevRef 5.5 uses the word "suite" quite a bit (and 5.5.1 even > refers to bookworm and bullseye as "suite names"), but it introduces > these target repositories as "distributions". ... snip ... > > These are the only sources I've seen so far using the even stricter > sense that distinguishes codenames from branchnames and doesn't allow > for DevRef-style "suite (code)names". > >> I now think https://piuparts.debian.org needs an update. :) > > The word it wants is something more like simply "tests". "Test > suites" would be conveniently ambiguous... Would I be understanding that we would offer Debian Suites: * Stable Suite -represented only as the Stable Suite * Testing Suite - represented only as the NewStable(?) Suite * UnStable Suite - represented only as The Sid(UnStable) Suite * Experimental Suite - represented only as RC-Buggy I think that would allow us to Grandfather Release/codenames at the same time. Release: $X; $Suite There would still be confusion on for example Debian Experimental. I am open to correction if I completely missed the intention/interpretation, there are a lot of differing release/suite/version notes pretty much everywhere which I am pulling this thought process from. -- - Be well, Donald Norwood -- - ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Donald Norwood ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ B7A1 5F45 5B28 7F38 4174 ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ D5E9 E5EC 4AC9 BD62 7B05
Attachment:
OpenPGP_0xE5EC4AC9BD627B05.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature