On 3/28/06, Orion Poplawski <orion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm thinking about building the HDF5 1.7 branch in FE development for > testing purposes. If it becomes the next upstream stable by the time > FC6 is released, then it goes into FE6. However, if it doesn't I'll > want to revert to the 1.6 series. Watching the FC5/FE5 release process > I'm not sure if this would have been possible. > > Thoughts, suggestions? Sure it would have been possible as long as you made your rollback to 1.6 series before the branch point of fe6. Does Extras development have an explicit garuntee of an update path inside the development branch itself? If not.. all you do revert the codebase in extras devel cvs and push a build of the older code base before devel branches for fe6. I believe this is pretty much how Core handles situations where codebases have to be rolled back late in the testing. If you need/want to keep the update path working cleaning from one devel update to another (which I frankly think is an unneeded burden) then you up the epoch number when you revert to the older version number. Epoch allows the lower version number'd package that you build looks "newer" when rpm does its version comparison. But like i said I think working about update paths which only affect development tree users is overkill and leads to epoch inflation. -jef -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
