On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 15:59:29 -0600, Ivan Gyurdiev wrote: > > Anyway, asking for a package in the FC2 extras repositories to be > > rebuilt against rawhide is answered with a clear "won't happen". > > The fedora/2 repositories will stay compatible with FC2. > > Hey, it makes sense to me. No, it doesn't. FC2 = Fedora Core 2 and not Fedora Core Development. > I'm just wondering why it is that people are > saying something different here. They aren't saying something different. ;) Your original message was from May 13th http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2004-May/msg00444.html and Warren's reply was correct in that he referred to the Fedora Core 1.9x extras repositories, which started with a mass rebuild against Test 1 and then were expanded with additional packages built against the current Fedora Core 2 development tree. All this was in preparation of Fedora Core 2. The key point to understand is that you want a tree of extra packages to stay in sync with Fedora Core Development _always_. > Furthermore, I don't see why you can't > have it both ways - keep one repository that's compatible, and another > that follows -devel. It's a matter of resources. You would need an additional monkey to monitor the [probably daily] mass rebuilds, deal with the usual wreckage in rawhide and report failed rebuilds of extra packages to their maintainers. Or even more monkeys to maintain the Fedora Core Development Extras tree independently and fix any problems themselves. The package maintainers are unlikely to follow Fedora Core Development till the first test release, however. And not all follow the test releases either.
