Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tuesday 09 January 2007 13:25, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > The tarball IMHO is not relevant. The upstream version is 2.6.20-rc4. > > It's a pre-release. And we have rules for how to package those: > > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines > > Section "Pre-Release packages": > > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#head-d97a3f40b > >6dd9d2288206ac9bd8f1bf9b791b22a > The tarball used is important in this case. This is rather thin... > The patches we prepare and such > are against the 2.6.19 tarball, NOT the 2.6.20. The unmodified source we're > using is 2.6.19 and that defines the release of the package. I'd just go with "It's in between 2.6.19 and 2.6.20, so 2.9.19-<release>. This is much simpler than the scheme proposed above. Or use that scheme /only/ if it is a rather long-lived "in-between" version that has its own "name recognition" (i.e., under duress). In the kernel's case the -rcX are short-lived. Besides, basing /any/ decision on the rcX number is misguided. It has happened that features are included and then ripped out again, and features in the vanilla kernel aren't in the distribution kernels, and viceversa. -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 2654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 2654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 2797513 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
