Re: Apt source file for etch.
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 11:14:00 -0500
Greg Folkert <greg@gregfolkert.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 09:48 +0000, Liam O'Toole wrote:
> > On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 01:15:53 -0500
> > Greg Folkert <greg@gregfolkert.net> wrote:
[...]
> > > On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 15:07 -0500, cga2000 wrote:
> > > Now. when Etch goes stable, The Official and security lines need
> > > to be changed to "stable"
> > >
> >
> > Alternatively, you can change the lines to "etch" right now. Then
> > you don't have to worry about the transition.
>
> Let us not go through that WHOLE ROUND of stuff again. Go back in the
> archives and search your suggestion. You shall see a I was going from
> Woody to Sarge to Etch to Sid (plus experimental on a few of those
> upgrade) using the release "name" and the
> stable/testing/unstable/experimental monikers as well.
>
> Yes, you could do that. But I don't want to get the ire of a few other
> people up again, as I'd have to go back to working on something that
> has already taken 40+ hours of my time to do a proper timeline and
> about 90-Bamillion upgrades, all in Virtual Machines.
I don't recall the debate you refer to. My suggestion above is what
I'll be doing. What's best for you is for you to decide.
--
Liam
Reply to: