Adam Williamson <awilliam <at> redhat.com> writes: > No, his point is that that's how it *should* be, but for TC1, doesn't > appear to be the case - the DVD and netinst images are named as if they > were RCs. BTW, the same name issue appears when booting the install images - they are named "20-Beta", instead of "20-Beta-TC1". How important is it to name the TCs differently? It seems like just a user convenience (and a hassle for whoever does the compose), and the RCs are named identically in any case, so the user still has to be careful. I put each compose in a separate directory, with ISOs named the same as in the corresponding CHECKSUM file, so they can be verified with "sha256sum -c *-CHECKSUM", and I tell them apart by directory. It doesn't help me much to have the TCs, but not the RCs, named uniquely. In principle it would be nice if both TCs and RCs were named uniquely, but I realize it would be even more of a hassle to rename the RC and recreate/edit the checksum file when one is picked as Gold. -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
