On Mon, 05 Aug 2024 10:12:40 +0800 Sean Whitton
wrote:
So far, although many people are sympathetic to the frustration at
distinguishing testing from unstable in practice, I don't believe anyone
has spoken in favour of overriding Santiago, besides Luca.
Hi,
as the maintainer (and upstream aut
Apologies for formatting of the following; I'm reading this using Gmail on
an Android tablet with a virtual keyboard.
I've read much but not necessarily all of the thread, so the following
might have been mentioned and dismissed already. My apologies if this is
the case.
Reading the thread, it s
Hello,
So far, although many people are sympathetic to the frustration at
distinguishing testing from unstable in practice, I don't believe anyone
has spoken in favour of overriding Santiago, besides Luca.
Also, the Release Team aren't happy with Luca's plan, so even if the TC
were to override Sa
Hi,
* Luca Boccassi [2024-08-03 16:15]:
The only question is whether they do that and then say "it's nice
that we have a common, standard, agnostic way of figuring this out
and it just works (TM) on Debian too", or, "man this Debian thing
sure is a gigantic pile of rubbish, it's so painful to
Hi Wouter,
I am continuing the off-topic part below. Earlier, in this discussion I
noted that being able to distinguish testing and unstable is rarely the
right thing to do. I'll use your nbd example to show why. Everyone not
interested in nbd autopktests may stop reading here.
On Sun, Aug 04, 20
On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 at 19:08, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> On Sat, Aug 03, 2024 at 04:15:36PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 at 21:29, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> > > > 2) Testing and unstable can continue to remain indistinguishable, and
> > > > both be erroneously identified as trix
On Sat, Aug 03, 2024 at 04:15:36PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 at 21:29, Helmut Grohne 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-r
On Sun, Aug 04, 2024 at 01:00:38PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi Wouter,
>
> On Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:07:14 +0200 Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > In the nbd autopkgtest, I need to do a debootstrap of "whatever we are
> > currently running". That code starts off with "parse os-release", and
> > then fall
On Sat, Aug 03, 2024 at 08:07:14PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> For what it's worth, I do have one argument in favour of your position.
> In the nbd autopkgtest, I need to do a debootstrap of "whatever we are
> currently running". That code starts off with "parse os-release", and
> then falls ba
Hi Wouter,
On Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:07:14 +0200 Wouter Verhelst wrote:
In the nbd autopkgtest, I need to do a debootstrap of "whatever we are
currently running". That code starts off with "parse os-release", and
then falls back to a horrible horrible perl script that parses
apt-cache policy output
On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 at 00:25, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> Luca Boccassi writes:
>
> > A trixie image is now in development, will become stable at some point
> > next year, will gain security support where it now has none, then it
> > will pass to the LTS team, then it will go EOL and any installation
11 matches
Mail list logo
