Plan for tomorrows (20070418) FESCO meeting

[Michael Schwendt]

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 12:17:58 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

> >> Example:
> >> - after F7 was branched change the disttag in devel to be ".1"
> >> - packages that get build afterwards pick it up
> >> - assume we have a mass-rebuild in F8 (we'll have one sooner or later in 
> >> any case, so lets just assume F8 for now)
> >> - F8 gets released and no packages shipped with it have a disttag "fc8" 
> >> now; new packages build after release get one, as that easier
> >> - F9 sees no mass rebuild; packages that were not rebuild during the 
> >> devel cycle F8 -> F9 can stay as they are; F9 gets release and there are 
> >> no packages with a ".fc8" in it, so we avoid the confusion we have now 
> >> (that is: ship F7 with packages that have fc6 in ENVR)
> > Yes, it hides/alters the dist tag for all packages that are (re)built
> > during the next devel cycle. Those, that are rebuilt frequently, lose the
> > "fc" in the dist tag and cannot get it back until a post-release update is
> > built.
> 
> Yes. But where is the problem with that?

Well, on one hand, .fc6 dist tags in Fedora 7 are considered bad and
confusing [*], and on the other hand, you eradicate "fc" in dist tags of
packages, which are updated during the devel period. So, many packages in
Fedora 8 would have .1 instead of a .fc8 as the dist tag, and although
they are for Fedora 8 actually, it cannot be seen in the file name.
Either the users expect Fedora 8 packages to have .fc8 in the name, or
they are confused by packages, which don't have .fc8 in the name, or they
don't care.

* = Is this crusade against a inherited packages based on experience with
a significant number of confused users (e.g. based on reports in message
boards)?