>>>>> "Luca" == Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org> writes:
Luca> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 at 13:00, Simon McVittie <s...@debian.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 02 Aug 2024 at 12:19:20 +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>> > To further clarify why the status quo with
>> VERSION_CODENAME=trixie in > sid is really bad: it used to be
>> that if you had "debian" mentioned in > os-release but no other
>> version identifying fields, you knew you were > on testing OR
>> unstable and you'd have to deploy horrendous hacks to > attempt
>> and figure out which of the two it was really.
>>
>> OK, I think this is progress:
>>
>> What is the scenario / use-case in which it becomes necessary to
>> distinguish between those two suites?
>>
>> To put that another way, what external piece of software needs to
>> change its behaviour, dependent on whether you are running
>> testing (of an unspecified datestamp) or unstable (of an
>> unspecified datestamp)?
>>
>> Or perhaps you are thinking of a scenario in which a *person*
>> needs to change their behaviour, dependent on whether they are
>> running testing or unstable?
Luca> Are the examples I provided at:
Luca> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1077764#43
Luca> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1077764#5
Not to me.
I read what I think is the examples you linked from both bug reports.
I didn't dig too far into the github links you provided though.
What I see from your mail is that people want to distinguish unstable
from testing and have created various hacks to do so.
What I do not see is a compelling explanation of why Debian as a project
wants to encourage that distinction.
I agree that people doing a thing is evidence that it has value to those
people.
But I do not think you provided an explanation of what that value is.
If it were easy to distinguish testing from unstable, why would I want
to do that?
--Sam
