> On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 12:56:12PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> > It is communicated directly at archive opening, when we upload the
> > base-files containing the os-release saying that:
> >
> > $ grep 24.10 /etc/os-release
> > VERSION_ID="24.10"
> > VERSION="24.10 (Oracular Oriole)"
> >
> > I believe it's fair to say at this point that even if we did
> > move a release, we'd not change the version anymore because
> > there will have been extensive communication over a multitude
> > of channels already using the version; third-party vendors
> > will have done testing against that specific version
> > string, etc.
>
> In this situation I'd be in favour of changing /etc/os-release (and
> distro-info-data etc) to match whatever we end up calling the release.
> Otherwise you'd end up with marketing materials saying one thing and
> /etc/os-release saying another, which would lead to no end of user
> support enquiries asking how to upgrade from one to the other.
>
> Before release, anything in the release is subject to change, so we
> wouldn't be breaking any promises or expectations. Some users would have
> to adapt in very specific cases, but that's what they would have signed
> up for by choosing to rely on development release.
The implementation maps VERSION_ID from /etc/os-release to the osVersion
key. Do you suggest to use VERSION_CODENAME from /etc/os-release
instead?
The spec [1] says about the osVersion description "The OS version,
typically corresponding to VERSION_ID in os-release". I am not sure if
we should osVersion in that case or introduce a new osVersionCodename
key.
[1] https://systemd.io/ELF_PACKAGE_METADATA/
--
Benjamin Drung
Debian & Ubuntu Developer
--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
