Re: request to remove "-updates" repository
Hello Adam,
On Sun, 5 Apr 2020 at 19:37, Adam D. Barratt <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2020-04-05 at 19:03 +0100, Samuel Henrique wrote:
> > I know I'm risking being unaware of something that invalidates this
> > request, so please also consider this a request for clarifications if
> > it's the case.
> >
> > While discussing #954460 [0] with Cyril, I decided to give it a try
> > to update the debian-reference section which mentions the "-updates"
> > repository[1], to make it more informative on what it's about, and
> > noticed that the reference does not mention that this repository is
> > enabled by default, currently putting it side-by-side with the
> > backports repository (which I consider a bad thing).
>
> By -updates, I assume you mean stable-updates.
That' s right
> > So I started thinking about how the whole section should be rewritten
> > to make it more clear how Debian deals with point releases and stable
> > updates, and I realized that "-updates" could actually just be
> > removed totally and updates could be pushed to the main repository
> > instead, thus reducing the complexity and helping with the user
> > confusion about what is "-updates" and how point releases works[2].
>
> What do you mean by "the main repository" here?
I meant to say the stable (or $codename) release's repository:
deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ buster main
> The entire point of stable-updates is that it contains packages that
> will be in a point release (and thus are already in proposed-updates)
> but that for some reason have been identified as important enough to be
> offered to users before the point release occurs.
>
> How would you see that function being fulfilled if the stable-updates
> suites were removed?
The idea was to use the release repository directly instead, since
"stable-updates" is enabled by default and not using it would be
equivalent to just not updating the system, so pushing the updates to
"deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ buster main" instead.
> > [2] unfortunately it's still very common for users to not understand
> > point releases are just the transition from -updates to the main
> > repo, and that considering -updates is already enabled, it makes no
> > difference as long as the system is updated.
>
> Point releases move packages from proposed-updates to stable, not from
> stable-updates. Packages in stable-updates never move to any other
> suite.
Hmm, that was a misconception of mine, I thought everything was going
to "stable-updates" automatically. This changes things a bit since
point releases then means actual changes even for somebody who just
updated the system right before so.
For the scope of "stable-updates" only then, would you say it makes
sense to just use "stable" instead, for the reasons I mentioned?
What do you say would be the negative impact of that (if any), since
the repository is already enabled by default and not using it is
equivalent to not updating the system until a point release gets out?
Thanks,
--
Samuel Henrique <samueloph>
Reply to: