Actually, there was one other change. Previously, netpanzer and netpanzer-data required equal versions of each other. This defeats the purpose of separation of data and code. Aside from erroneously adding the disttag, I altered the Requires. netpanzer requires netpanzer-data>=0.8, and netpanzer >= 0.8. This allows netpanzer to be updated without updating netpanzer-data, from this version forward. If we can just remove the most recent builds, I can repair the disttag and re-do the RQ changes and re-build. I assume I should re-increment the release number just to be on the safe side? > > > Michael Schwendt wrote: >> On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 17:09:33 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: >> >>> >>> Jon Ciesla wrote: >>>> Sounds logical. I was unaware of this practice. How might I ((do >>>> that)||(have it done))? >>>> >>> Build it for devel only, and it must be noarch without a disttag and >>> then add a copy request here: >>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/RepoRequests >>> >>> Then you also don't need to rebuild it with the next mass rebuild, also >>> saving all users a huge download when updating from one release to >>> another. >> >> As a side-note, the netpanzer* packages have not been pushed yet, but >> been >> put onto the blacklist until this issue is solved. >> > > Good, Jon, AFAIK the only changes to the data packages was to add the > (unwanted) disttag, so the data packages can be discarded, right? In > that case don't forget to role back CVS. > > I dunno if you also made changes to other netpanzer packages and if > those still need to be pushed. > > Regards, > > Hans > > -- > fedora-extras-list mailing list > fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list > -- novus ordo absurdum -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
