Steve Grubb wrote: > OK, it took 3 builds to get libprelude squared away. Now because > force-tag is no longer available, we have libprelude-0.9.20.2-1 in > rawhide and libprelude-0.9.20.2-3 aimed at F-9 inclusion. [...] > Whoever does that n-v-r upgrade from F-9 to F-10 report may need to > take into account that we all have to increment release numbers > which makes it real hard to get the upgrade path right if anaconda > does not favor packages within its own repo. Not to ignore the hassle factor for you, but I think that regardless of the reason that the F-9 branch needed to be rebuilt more often than the devel branch, this section of the guidelines covers how best to handle such bumps in older branches: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Minor_release_bumps_for_old_branches So you could have just bumped the F-9 branch to 0.9.20.2-1.fc9.1, .2, etc. Then it would still have an n-v-r less than the devel branch does at 0.9.20.2-1.fc10. -- Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ You know an odd feeling? Sitting on the toilet eating a chocolate candy bar. -- George Carlin, Napalm & Silly Putty
Attachment:
pgpDP2xVDxdBE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
