Re: when does one change from testing to stable in sources.list
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 12:31:03AM +0100, Jesús M. Navarro wrote:
> Hi, Tom:
>
> On Friday 10 December 2010 12:04:33 Tom Furie wrote:
> > On 10/12/2010 10:04, Jesús M. Navarro wrote:
> > > On Thursday 09 December 2010 21:05:00 Tom Furie wrote:
> > >> As others have mentioned, though you might not have seen the replies if
> > >> you weren't CC'd on them, you could change from 'testing' to 'squeeze'
> > >> now as they are currently the same thing. Then when squeeze goes stable
> > >> you could change to 'stable', this will allow you to track the stable
> > >> distribution and it will upgrade to the next stable 'wheezy', when that
> > >> is released.
> > >
> > > I wouldn't suggest that as it can deal to unexpected surprises.
> > >
> > > Of course, you can do as you see, but in order to track Stable, I always
> > > suggest doing it by tracking codename changes, so stay with, say, squeeze
> > > till you know wheezy has come Stable and you are ready for the upgrade,
> > > then change the codename on your sources and do it.
> >
> > Why? What's the difference between having stable in the source list and
> > automatically upgrading when the new stable is released - all upgrade
> > issues *should* be worked out by then
>
> Except those that depend on you yourself.
>
> Some examples:
> * Having something more urgent to do right now.
> * Being unable to take your servers off-line.
> * Having internal packages that need to be tested.
> * Having 1000 servers to take care of, so it will take a while to upgrade them
> all.
If you stayed with "testing" you would run a slight risk of things going
wrong. In return you would have incremental upgrades rather than the big
bangs of release changes.
heers,
David
Reply to: