Core Packages in Violation of the Fedora Naming Guidelines

[Jesse Keating]

On Wednesday 12 July 2006 11:02, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > But what does this actually solve?
>
> It solves the "package name says it's for fc6, but it's not really for fc6
> but some older rawhide/test state"

By that method, at release time we'll have _no_ packages that are for fc6 
since they'll all come from the devel branch.  If you want packages that 
aren't for the next release, don't put them in devel, scratch build them, 
mock build them, whatever.

> > You want to remove dist tags for the devel
> > branch, only to reintroduce them in a way that isn't consistant with the
> > other dist tags?  I don't get it....
>
> People don't want to remove dist from devel, what they want is to avoid
> people pulling an old "fc6" package from some badly synced mirror after
> fc6 is released only to discover it's not really for the released fc6

If they're pulling packages by hand they get to keep all the pieces they 
break.  If they're pulling from an out of date mirror, we need to fix the 
mirroring system to prevent this, not break the build system to accommodate a 
broken mirroring system.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20060712/66cd11ee/attachment.sig>