1. 31
  1.  

  2. 4

    Does anyone else find the codenames inscrutable and annoying? I realize they’re cute or whatever, but they fail at the one practical purpose they actually have, which is to be version numbers. What’s the previous version? Is version A newer or older than version B? At least Ubuntu also has sensible version numbers, although many people, including most insiders (in my experience) seem to prefer the codenames.

    1. 7

      Debian does have version numbers (bullseye is 11 in this case) but you’re right that similar to Ubuntu most folks use the codenames.

      I think the codenames are cute, and the theme has some history around it. The debian project leader at the time they were introduced was working at Pixar, and from what I recall the first “official” debian repo was just a workstation sitting under a desk somewhere at Pixar.

      1. 3

        In my experience, people have difficulty remembering any codename except the current stable (as long as it’s been stable for a while, which means we’re about to be in trouble) and “sid”, which is always testing. [edit: and I’ve been using Debian regularly since 1.3]

        I think I shall suggest that every place the codename is used, the major version corresponding to it should be accepted, so that you can replace “buster” with “10” everywhere.

        1. 3

          Wasn’t “sid” unstable, with testing being the codename of the next release?

          1. 4

            Yes.

            (And so I inadvertently prove my point.)

      2. 1

        I want to say that I really like NixOS version: NixOS 21.05 “Okapi”. Having both year.month and codename is helpful and cute. Alas, I am using the unstable rolling release :-)

      3. 2

        Bullseye is… Woody’s horse in Toy Story 2?

        I hope they never name a Debian release after Stinky Pete.

        1. 5

          You can see the list of future codenames here: https://wiki.debian.org/DebianReleases

          Bookworm & Trixie are next apparently.