On Wed, 2015-06-17 at 03:48 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote: > > > > here's the meeting logs where disttag was made mandatory: > > > > http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2014-12 > > -04/fpc.2014-12-04-17.02.log.html > > > > Looks like most of those packages could have it added but there are > > a > > few exceptions (the fedora-release-* packages were noted in that > > meeting). > > > > -Toshio > > Thanks for the link. I'm not sure I understood the reason for having > an exception for fedora-{release,repos}*. The log says: > > 17:41:58 <tibbs|w> There's no reason for them to do so, since their > version is tied to the distro version. > > Which is true, but why is that a reason to grant them an exception? > Would it cause any problems it they contained a distro tag as well? > Yes, because this is the package that provides the definition of the distro tag. It couldn't install itself. > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
