On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 05:20:08PM +0100, Nils Philippsen wrote: > On Mon, 2020-01-13 at 10:34 +0100, Petr Pisar wrote: > > (2) The new values must be larger than all historical values (across > > all historical Fedora releases). That assures than a new build won't > > become obsoleted because of a decreased release. > > can you clarify what you mean with "historical values/releases" here? > Would it include all currently active releases at some point in time > (i.e. everything up to F32/rawhide ATM)? > Not ontly currently active. Users also upgrade from just end-of-lifed distribution to a next one. It must also cover at least one distribution before the latest active one. > The way I see it, we should have a differently phrased requirement, > ensuring that within an upstream version of a package, the release of a > build in a higher Fedora release should be "newer" than of any previous > build (for the same version) in an older release. > Yes. You are right. My requirement was too strong. Probably stemming from the fact that many packages do not recieve any version bump and the only changing part is the Release string. -- Petr
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
