Core Packages in Violation of the Fedora Naming Guidelines
jmoyer at redhat.com
Tue Jul 11 22:54:44 UTC 2006
==> Regarding Re: Core Packages in Violation of the Fedora Naming Guidelines; Jeremy Katz <katzj at redhat.com> adds:
katzj> On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 17:13 -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>> ==> Regarding Core Packages in Violation of the Fedora Naming Guidelines; "Tom 'spot' Callaway" <tcallawa at redhat.com> adds:
tcallawa> Bad beta naming (should be e.g. foo-1.8.1-0.1.beta5)
>> The upstream package is named autofs-5.0.0_betaX. You can't impose Fedora
>> naming conventions on upstream packages.
katzj> The upstream tarball can be named based on whatever upstream wants to
katzj> smoke. But by versioning the package this way, there isn't an upgrade
katzj> path from 5.0.0 beta to 5.0.0 final unless you a) add an epoch or b) do
katzj> something silly like autofs-5.0.0_final.
Yeah, thanks for pointing this out. How do you suggest this gets fixed
moving forward, then?
More information about the Fedora-maintainers