On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Yann Dirson wrote: > In sources.list what we write is "stable" or "woody" (although I urge > everyone NEVER to use "stable" in their sources.list), not 3.0. It is
You can write in a version number too, though the format is not so nice.. Perhaps you should ask ftpmaster to include version symlinks that don't include the release sub version. I think that's a good idea and then you can encourage people to use '3.0' in their S.L and '3.0' as their pinning specs. Personally I think the last release is going to be the last one that uses codenames at all. They only existed to make FTP maintinance easier and the pool scheme is a much better approach. With the current testing scheme it is nonsensical to want to pin to some etheral 'unstable' that will eventually become 'testing' and eventually 'stable'. It doesn't work that way anymore. unstable is called unstable, it has no code name and no version number. Testing is the closest thing to what unstable used to be, but the way it is used today you either follow testing or you don't. It's pointless to only track testing until a release happens then fall back to stable - unless we are nearing a release, in which case testing will have a release version number, and you can pin to it. Jason
