Re: change sources.list to follow testing, not jessie
On Friday 17 April 2015 15:08:13 The Wanderer wrote:
> My point is that it's easy to take this approach even with sources.list
> naming testing explicitly, simply by not initiating the actual upgrade.
> There's no need to track a release by codename, even temporarily, in
> order to avoid the chaos.
A valid point. But changing code name reduces the risk of absentmindedly
upgrading and then thinking oops. Particularly in the case of the OP, who
expected changing Jessie to testing now, to have some impact and be a valid
test of the result of tracking testing.
Your approach also involves keeping a good track of the date. I have no doubt
you do. But judging by how often we have been asked the projected date for
Jessie's release, that does not apply to everyone.
You come into the category of those who know what they're doing and can, if
necessary, sort out messes. Not all do.
And I am paranoid about my own incompetence and forgetfulness. :-(