On 3/10/15, Bret Busby <bret.bu...@gmail.com> wrote: > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Bret Busby <bret.bu...@gmail.com> > Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 22:54:42 +0800 > Subject: Re: Bug#780201: new codename needed for oldstable (due to > squeeze-lts) when stable becomes oldstable > To: debian-...@lists.debian.org > > On 10/03/2015, Andreas Glaeser <bugs.andreas.glae...@freenet.de> wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> On Tue, 10 Mar 2015 12:38:29 +0100 >> Holger Levsen <hol...@layer-acht.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> when jessie will be released, wheezy will become oldstable and we'll >>> need >>> a >>> new alias for squeeze, as various tools internally work with aliases. >>> (The >>> >>> security tracker comes to my mind, but also the Release files it seems. >>> And >>> probably more.) >>> < snipped for brevity> >>> >>> Current suggestions I've heard (and liked) are "oldoldstable" and >>> "veryoldstable". >>> >>> I *dislike* "obsoletestable" and "stalestable" as they are either wrong >>> (squeeze is not obsolete) or carry a bad connotation. >> >> What about 'extremely-stable' ?? >> > > Why not simply use the states > experimental > unstable > testing > > and for the stable version > stable and version number (eg Debian7) > > and all preceding versions, > version number > eg > Debian6 LTS > Debian 5 > Debian4 > etc
Coming into this just now and immediate response was....... HEY, I *like* that... maybe with no capital letters where possible unless that's a longstanding "head nod", name *RESPECT* thing toward Debian. That would certainly be understandable. Its concept is obviously that, when any stable becomes an old stable, all that's needed for identification purposes forever after that is the referenced prior release's original/primary defining "6" or "7" or "8", etc... NOTE: While proofreading this email before sending, comes to mind that yes, codenames would do similar BUT... With a numerical based method, a new user could walk in not knowing code names and yet still be able to reasonably maneuver around. Example there would be where we can currently replace "stable" with "testing" or "unstable" in Debian.org's website hierarchy structure to successfully navigate within the packages subdomain......... The way I'm grasping via the Bug's commentary, specifically Bret's suggestion, is that the addition into wherever is appropriate/necessary, could be similar to, say, like where we add in a "free floating" "jessie" or "sid" to debootstrap's command.. Or like where we see similar looking "free floating" personalizations in a string within grub.cfg, maybe. Yeah, I know, probably apples and oranges comparison to bug originator's intent, but it's what my mind is visualizing for potential usage as you all chat this up. Oh, and that _already_ "free floating" LTS notation might then need addressed within a "free floating" usage situation, I think...... I think. Otherwise additional keystrokes (ack!) with respect to parentheses then become necessary? Maybe? Ok, I'll stop now. *grin* Cindy :) -- Cindy-Sue Causey Talking Rock, Georgia USA * User Tip: Wondering what packages are available in stable? Check this out: https://packages.debian.org/stable/ Simply replace "stable" with "testing" or "unstable" if you use either instead. * -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAO1P-kAfmgM=sufjecu0nqb+e-3wnc9a-5mlxfrbwbmkfhy...@mail.gmail.com
