On 18 August 2010 09:02, Norman Silverstone <nor...@littletank.org> wrote: > >> The name is only supposed to be used by developers during the >> development cycle. Once it releases it becomes 10.04, 10.10 etc. > > Assuming what you say is correct then why are the names still used in > the listed Software Sources? >
That's due to the way the software is organised on the repositories. On the front screen it mentions the sections of the repository "main", "universe", "restricted" and "multiverse", but it's only on the Updates tab where it mentions (in brackets) the code name, and only because that's the technical name of that part of the repository. So for example on mine it says "Important security updates (lucid-security)" which is a non-technical way of referring to "http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/lucid-security/";. We inherit this setup from Debian. However they also link the version numbers in their archive. So for example debian 4.0 has the codename 'etch' and thus their archive URLs are like this http://archive.debian.org/debian/dists/etch/ however they also have links which reference the version number which point to the same place such as http://archive.debian.org/debian/dists/Debian-4.0/ . Perhaps we should do the same thing and then remove the codenames from software sources? Cheers, Al. -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
