fre 2011-09-09 klockan 16:08 -0400 skrev Jonathan Masters: > Only thing I would add is that we had been just adding "arm1" (no period) to NV*R* (release bit). I don't object rootfs your suggestion but we should standardize. Opinions? To follow sane naming guidelines there need to be a period at least before the added tag .arm1, if not it flows together with the release tag resulting in a quite messy version (see yum) not sure if it's meaningful or not to have the middle dot (arm.1). I guess the NVR compare works correct in both cases, and looks better without the dot. But to avoid conflict with branch updates we should add a leading 0 .0.arm1 or .0.arm.1 resuting in example-1.0-1.fc15.0.arm1 which works well even if there later is a branch specific bugfix released in mainline. example-1.0-1.fc15 (mainline) example-1.0-1.fc15.0.arm1 (arm fixed) example-1.0-1.fc15.1 (mainline) example-1.0.1.fc15.1.arm1 (if needed.. hopefully not) Regards Henrik _______________________________________________ arm mailing list arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
