use disttag ".1" for devel to avoid confusion

[Axel Thimm]

On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 07:40:28PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 04.06.2007 19:20, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 07:11:14PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> >> On 04.06.2007 18:56, Axel Thimm wrote:
> >  [...]
> >> /me more and more gets the feeling people don't understand what I'm up
> >> to; of I'm really missing something here.
> > /me thinks you should just fast forward to F9 and try to submit a
> > package with your model to see what's wrong.
> 
> Could you please use the example I gave in reply to Jesse to show me
> "what's wrong"?

Where is the new package submission that wants to use the same
specfile for F8/F9 and devel? Not possible anymore? That's the
catch. As said, your proposal is just a disguised way back to not
using disttags at all. Why bother having a ".1" then at all?

> > /me also thinks you should start testing release ids of "1.1" vs "1" to
> > id some more flaws in this.
> 
> What are you up to? "1.1" is of course higher then ".1"

I'm not talking disttags, but minor fixes in the buildid as in
<releasetag>=<buildid><disttag> choosing a disttag that start with
letters was designed that way see the discussion during FC1.

E.g. now

kernel-1.2.3-4.EL5, small fix or simple rebuild (like your EPEL rebuild)
  => kernel-1.2.3-4.0.1.EL5

in your model
kernel-1.2.3-4.1, => kernel-1.2.3-4.0.1.1 => broken upgrade paths.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- 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/20070604/30cd4b2b/attachment.sig>