On Sat, 02 Nov 2013 22:11:19 +0100, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote: > > On Sat, 02 Nov 2013 19:39:38 +0100, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote: > > >> _rawhide_ is not an *old branch* . And it never was. > >> > >> To have {?dist}.X in rawhide should be impossible. > >> > >> It breaks the laws of thermodynamics!! > > > > It looks ugly, but it's harmless. > > Harmless or not, but it breaks the Fedora policy. That would be an overly pedantic interpretation of the guidelines. Nothing forbids N.%{?dist}.X in Rawhide. Bumping N is preferred, of course, but since Rawhide is supposed to contain the "latest" (i.e. package with the highest EVR) anyway, rebuild attempts or bug-fix attempts could bump X at the end. And, (again) of course, the packager ought to get rid of that appended stuff eventually. You need to understand that "Minor_release_bumps_for_old_branches" are also applied by the rpmdev-bumpspec script as a valid fallback, if no release versioning scheme is recognised in a spec file (e.g. because of macro-madness) during a mass-rebuild for Rawhide. If you want that script to not increase the least-significant part of the Release tag, further development of it will be needed. Perhaps with a completely different approach that would evaluate the %release value and rewrite the Release tag from scratch if necessary, deleting macro-madness, annoying some packagers. ;) $ rpm -q kernel kernel-3.12.0-0.rc7.git0.1.fc21.x86_64 kernel-3.12.0-0.rc7.git1.2.fc21.x86_64 kernel-3.12.0-0.rc7.git2.2.fc21.x86_64 Apparently, not even the kernel package applies Fedora's official pre-release snapshot release scheme. It would need to be a combination of these two: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages It isn't easy to get all package maintainers to use simple release versioning schemes, throwing away the flexibility they want. As you've found out in the opening post of this thread already, there are packages that don't adhere to the guidelines. The guidelines are quite complex with regard to post/pre-release snapshots from SCM systems. Some packagers don't violate the upgrade path, if they apply their own working scheme. Others get it wrong, if they are forced to follow lengthy guidelines. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct