Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=760294 --- Comment #4 from Richard Shaw <hobbes1069@xxxxxxxxx> 2012-01-08 10:20:05 EST --- (In reply to comment #2) > I just took the version number as upstream put it: 1.0.0a > > As far as I get it, this is the way to go: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Non-Numeric_Version_in_Release > > Please correct me, if I'm wrong! The guidelines could be more clear here. This is definitely a post-release package so we need to start there[1], however, in that section of the guidelines it goes back to showing examples of the progression from pre-release, release, and then post-release. The first post-release examples is: foo-1.1.0-2.GA1 (post release, GA1) Of course this one starts at Release "2" because the "1" was used by the initial release of the package. Since this package didn't exist in Fedora yet it would start at "1" [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Post-Release_packages (In reply to comment #3) > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Post-Release_packages > > I think you're right! A 1.0.0b was released on the 29th of December. It is not > on the frontpage though. > > http://www.gaia-gis.it/FreeXL/freexl-sources/ > > If the schema is kept like this, I can put that all in "Version". No, I think the "b" still goes in the release field. Richard -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review