Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asl - Macro Assembler AS https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240807 ------- Additional Comments From eric@xxxxxxxxxxxx 2007-06-03 18:36 EST ------- Thanks for the further clarifications. Since there was a discrepancy between the build release and changelog history, I'll use 1 for the build release for the next spec as you've requested. After re-reading the "Non-Numeric Version in Release" portion of the Packaging/Naming Guidelines, I can't find anything suggesting that "bld" needs to be expanded to "build": %{alphatag} is the string that came from the version. In this case, "the string that came from the version" is clearly "bld". I don't see any documentation suggesting that the alphatag should be converted into a canonical form. However, it does say that there should be a dot between my build number and the alpha tag, so it appears that I should submit a packaged named asl-1.42-0.1.bld55 If there is documentation supporting replacing "bld" with "build", please provide a reference, and I'll do it. Thanks! Eric -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review