On Mon, 4 Jun 2007 20:50:41 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 07:57:33PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Mon, 4 Jun 2007 19:20:43 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > > > > > No, you don't have to. It can stay at ".1" forever; if you update > > > > something for devel and/or a release distribution just increase the > > > > portion left of the disttag -- that's what we do in any case. > > > > > > which is just the same as not having any disttags at all and led to > > > the pain before the disttag. > > > > It's painless. Package is only updated when somebody maintains it. > > We hope all packages are maintained. :) > > Just introduce a package into FC6 and F7. And then have a security > update. You start juggling around with reserving build tags like > > foo-1.2.3-1 (fc6) > foo-1.2.3-2 (f7) > > fix: > > foo-1.2.3-3 (fc6) > foo-1.2.3-4 (f7) or: foo-1.2.3-1.1 (fc6) foo-1.2.3-2.1 (f7) foo-1.2.3-1.3 (fc6) foo-1.2.3-2.2 (f7) foo-1.2.3-1.4 (fc6) foo-1.2.3-2.2 (f7) It has worked fine for many package maintainers for many years. And %dist does not help when bumping %version still breaks an ISO-based dist-upgrade. > "Hey", some people cry in the background, "we still have fc5 > maintained", "please push it to fc5 as well". The same people who cry when the untested mass-updates are broken? No, thanks. You are free to use %dist when it is available and fulfills your needs. I'm only convinced it bears the risk of sloppy cut'n'paste mass-updates, reduced spec readability because of conditional sections, no testing, %changelog madness, reduced package quality. Some of that experience has its origin in watching fellow packagers struggle with mass-updates for FE. -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
