On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 at 19:08, Wouter Verhelst <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 03, 2024 at 04:15:36PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote: > > On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 at 21:29, Helmut Grohne <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > 2) Testing and unstable can continue to remain indistinguishable, and > > > > both be erroneously identified as trixie > > > > > > Isn't there the third option of adhering to the os-release specification > > > without making testing and unstable distinguishable? I did not see this > > > ranked in your preference. Do you see it as even worse than the status > > > quo? > > > > There isn't such option. Adhering to the specification means > > identifying them separately, given they can be built separately, ran > > separately, managed separately. So the option you are referring to is > > for the opposite: _not_ adhering to the specification, and yes, that > > is an option. > > For completion's sake: > > There is a third option of updating the os-release specification to > declare that there is no relevant difference between distributions such > as Debian's testing and unstable (for some definition of a class of > distributions that would encompass the two) and that it is not necessary > for os-release files to distinguish between them. > > I make no statement as to whether this is a good idea or not, but it is > definitely a possibility.
That would make it contradictory with itself and everything else that uses it, so it's not a change that would be acceptable.
