On Sat, Aug 03, 2024 at 04:15:36PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 at 21:29, Helmut Grohne <hel...@subdivi.de> 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.
--
w@uter.{be,co.za}
wouter@{grep.be,fosdem.org,debian.org}
I will have a Tin-Actinium-Potassium mixture, thanks.
