On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 08:22 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 09.01.2007 02:16, Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 11:55 -0700, Lamont Peterson wrote: > >> On Monday 08 January 2007 04:13am, buildsys@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >>> Updated Packages: > >> [snip] > >>> kernel-2.6.19-1.2906.fc7 > >>> ------------------------ > >>> * Sun Jan 07 2007 Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> - 2.6.20rc4 > >> So, Dave ... > >> 1. Is this a 2.6.19 or 2.6.20 kernel (or that changelog entry a typo)? > > 2.6.20rc4 He can't increment the version to 2.6.20 until the official > > release because of RPM NVR rules. E.g. 2.6.20rc4 > 2.6.20 > > Sure he can -- we even have rules for that; those suggest to call it > 2.6.20 even afaics: > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#head-d97a3f40b6dd9d2288206ac9bd8f1bf9b791b22a Hm, I had very much forgotten about that. > If I would review the kernel for the extras merge I'd say "fix this". > But I suspect davej won't like to call the kernels 2.6.20 (e.g. > 2.6.20-1.2906.rc4.fc7 for example) before they are actually 2.6.20 Neither would I. It's not 2.6.20. It's 2.6.19 + patches. :) > This will be one of the problem areas we'll probably have to deal with > when it comes to reviewing Core packages for the Extras merge. Perhaps. Maybe we'll come to some sort of agreement fairly quickly. josh -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
