A silly question about our "FC" tag

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 12:08:15AM -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-11-16 at 17:11 -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >> Actually not if done in conjunction with a release bump, such as we do
> >> with a mass rebuild.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Only if we make a promise to never use the same base n-v-r across the
> > releases until whichever release we did the mass rebuild on is retired.
> >
> > You are correct in that if we did a mass rebuild in dist-f13, we could
> > move to .f##, but consider 3 days later a maintainer wants to push a new
> > upstream release across the branches:
> >
> > foo-1.2-1.fc11
> > foo-1.2-1.fc12
> > foo-1.2-1.f13
> >
> > We're back in the same boat where the "fc" packages will be n-v-r
> > higher.
> >
> 
> Is RPM so hard to hack to work this around?
> 
There's many things that need to be changed in rpm but IMHO this isn't one
of them.  RPM produces predictable versioning.  Hacking it up with special
cases will lead nowhere but pain.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20091117/8f020c7c/attachment.sig>