On Fri, 2006-06-16 at 08:55 -0500, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-06-16 at 15:39 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>
> > > The guidelines also mention that use of %{?dist} is optional and not
> > > necessary in _any_ package.
> > One of the unclearnesses I don't find helpful.
> >
> > At the moment, we have various styles of release tags, which all are
> > incompatible and without any guarantee of a clear upgrade path ...
>
> In Core? Yes.
Some random examples:
..
ant-antlr-1.6.5-1jpp_9fc.i386.rpm
..
dmraid-devel-1.0.0.rc11-FC6.i386.rpm
> In Extras? No.
Yes. There exist packagers who (In FE devel)
* don't use %{?dist} at all
* some use N%{?dist} and increment N with each iteration.
* some use N%{?dist}.M and increment M with each build-iteration
Now consider moving such a package from FE to FC (and from mock to
brew).
> We obviously care, or we wouldn't be having these discussions, we'd be
> telling you to shut up and do what Red Hat says. Count the number of
> non-RH names on the Fedora packaging committee.
Well, on one hand you told "Same packaging conventions in FC as in FE",
the other hand you are telling "%{dist} won't ever be in brew".
=> project has failed even before it started?
> There are lots of areas where core will have to improve to meet the
> guidelines, and none of them will happen over night.
Well, I'd put NEVR conventions on a top priority item on the agenda.
Ralf
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
