Michael Stone <mst...@debian.org> writes: > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 08:07:51PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: >>On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 8:04 PM Michael Stone wrote: >>> Having "stable" in sources.list is broken, because one day stuff goes >>> from working to not working, which requires manual intervention, at >>> which point someone could have just changed the name. Having codenames >>> in sources.list is broken, because even people who have been developers >>> for two decades can't remember which release is which without looking it >>> up. (Which is harder than it should be; maybe we should have had >>> /etc/debian-releasenames or somesuch from the beginning. lsb_release -a >>> is helpful when available but doesn't have context, and many users don't >>> know it exists.) >> >>Personally, I can remember the names and their order much better than >>which version goes with which codename or suite :) > > Well, every problem domain has its rainman :) For the rest of us, > there's google.
Personally, I use wikipedia's page about debian revisions, and it's not that uncommon an event for me to need to look that up just to make sure I've not made a stupid typo. I like the idea of adding the list of releases somewhere (probably under /usr/share/doc though, and including dates for start and end of support etc. perhaps) Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
