On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 10:49 -0500, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 12:35 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>
> > Use
> > 7%{?dist} or 6%{dist}.1, where the latter is a bit dangerous, too, since when
> > built locally with %dist undefined, Joe User ends up with 6.1, which is higher
> > than 6.fc6, for instance.
Well, it can be argued too that getting the same NEVR from a local
rebuild as is in the corresponding distro package is "dangerous" too as
the package is not the same.
> Indeed. Perhaps we should only allow integer release increments?
That's very wasteful in cases where only an old distro version needs a
fix as it will require rebuilds of not only the package fixed in an old
distro version, but all in newer distro versions too, just for the sake
of keeping the upgrade path intact. Useless downloads, potential config
file annoyance etc.
> I can document this in the guidelines...
+1 for mandating integer-only bumps in cases where it won't cause an
upgrade problem, and appending dots and digits to the very *right* of
the release tag otherwise (including after the disttag). See also
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-May/msg00083.html
--
fedora-extras-list mailing list
fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
