On 26/06/2019 19:58, Michael Stone wrote: > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 02:23:40PM -0500, Andrej Shadura wrote: >> On Wed, 26 Jun 2019 at 14:13, Michael Stone <mst...@debian.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 03:10:27PM +0200, Philip Hands wrote: >>> >I'm perfectly capable of typing slink when I meant stretch. The coming >>> >era of b* releases is going to be a right pain for me. >>> >>> FWIW, I still confuse bo and buzz. :) >> >> How about buzz and buzzter? :) > > They're all terrible. I routinely say squeeze when I mean stretch, and > then when I log in somewhere and see stretch I wonder why it's running > such an old release. :( >
Think again about why we have release names at all: Debian 1.0 never happened because somebody packaged a pre-release semi-broken version as Debian 1.0 on their CDs. At that point, Debian chose to also use codenames to refer to releases in progress. For me, I like the idea of being able to use the codename as soon as it is usable - that means that the distro tracks from unstable -> testing -> stable without a change. Pinning to stable is a silly idea in /etc/apt/sources.list - as soon as a release state changes - so if I have "stable" as my referent with 9.9, there'll be chaos as Buster is released and a forced upgrade Having stable, testing, unstable as labels does mean I have to explain more to colleagues but it also means that I can confidently tell my colleagues: "Use the latest released stable Debian version if you want longer term support" That, and the fact that security updates refuse to apply with an error message if you're too far behind / the clock is wrong are both fantastic features IMHO. All the very best, as ever, Andy C.
