On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 03:08:38AM -0400, Jon Masters wrote: > On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 10:10 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > > > So why would you make a change to the spec file, without bumping the > > release? > > Because (with all due respect) it seems silly to bump the release just > to deal with fat-fingering something. It happens countless times too. > > > Also there's an auditing GPL legal reason (IIRC) that we're > > doing this now. > > Can someone confirm that this legal reason actually exists? i.e. if one > builds packages that are never released, how is it then a problem to > retag? And besides, CVS history is still coherent in either case. The question is - can an automated tool, given a binary RPM, request of CVS the corresponding source code for it? Yes, unless people can arbitrarily re-tag after the packages have been published. Then there is no guarantee that what is tagged in CVS matches the source code for a given package. -- Matt Domsch Linux Technology Strategist, Dell Office of the CTO linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
