On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 23:53 +0200, David Nielsen wrote: > > > 2009/6/19 Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> > > mono-tools-2.4.2-1.fc12 > ----------------------- > * Tue Jun 09 2009 Paul F. Johnson > <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> - 2.4.2-1 > - Bump to 2.4.2 preview 1 > - Add support for ppc and ppc64 > > - Add label for udev-acl > > > > is there any reason why mono doesn't use the 0.x revision tags > for alpha/beta/RC releases like everyone else? > > Plenty of projects fall outside that naming scheme, it's unfortunate > but that is life. Maybe upstream will consider your thoughts on the > matter if you bring them to their attention. > > - David /me understands that the issue is with versioning of the package, not in upstream. The changelog clearly says it's "2.4.2 preview 1" and the release number in package should reflect it, e.g. by having the NVR mono-tools-2.4.2-0.1.pre1.fc12. It helps users of that package to easier tell that its actually a pre-release, not a "stable release". Martin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
