use disttag ".1" for devel to avoid confusion

[Axel Thimm]

On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 04:09:05PM -0400, Christopher Aillon wrote:
> I've seen bugs filed on packagers for not using the disttag before.  We 
> should not encourage disttag everywhere, only where it makes sense.  If 
> packages don't get updated once between releases, maybe the disttag is 
> not useful for that package and it's usage ought to be _dis_couraged in 
> this situation.

That's a sane attitude and IMHO is the current state of affairs: If
the packager identifies that he shares specfiles across releases he
grabs disttags to be able to keep the specfiles the same and not have
to cache integers for managing concurrent releases.

There are packages were disttags make no sense whatsoever like
fedora-release(-notes), data packages, firmwares, very often fonts and
so on. These should really not be disttagged only because it's custom
to do so.
-- 
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/f682e028/attachment.sig>