David Wright wrote: > songbird wrote: ... >> except that is a misconception for those who are running >> testing. we're not upgrading to a new release. > > I don't understand. Suite testing was codenamed bookworm until today, > and now testing is codenamed trixie. Why is that not a new release?
testing is still testing is it not? they didn't delete it and then create it again. i don't think they'd do something like that, but even if they did how would someone outside the release team know? they just created a new directory structure with the codename and put links to the packages that were the same as testing. it is like taking a snapshot but you don't destroy the original directory. after that point testing and stable diverge as changes are made (under the rules and procedures of the release team and the various software gatekeepers, security team, etc.). you could say that as soon as the first change happens that trixie is underway and i wouldn't argue too much about that at all, but i don't consider it anything other than testing and a release candidate for trixie. it's not officially a stable release for another 24-?? months and as such it isn't really named by me, but others can consider it what they want. it's only the view of the release team that really counts (and their established procedures and tools). it's like the chicken and egg problem applied to making a cake. at some point you start with an empty bowl and then put in ingredients and then at some future point (when the baking is done) you have a cake (when it is released from the pan or even taken from the oven - as some people do eat the cake directly from the pan). flour alone isn't the cake. so let's just say that testing is the bowl which holds the ingredients of the next potential stable release, you can call it what you want but it isn't an official release until the release team kicks it out the door with the codename (or not as perhaps some year we run out of codenames or Debian stops producing official images of any kind or ...). songbird