use disttag ".1" for devel to avoid confusion

[Axel Thimm]

On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 10:55:27PM +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 04:31:56PM -0400, Christopher Aillon wrote:
> > 
> > My argument is that if packages don't get updated that often, disttag is 
> > rather useless as the chances are low that it will get a fedora udpate 
> > pushed.  And on the off-chance it does, diverging a specfile once is not 
> > a big deal.
> > 
> > I think this is _NOT_ the current state of affairs else we would not 
> > have as many .fc6 packages as we do in F-7.  Those packages should have 
> > the disttag removed IMO.
> 
> Maybe some, but not necessarily all of them. Taking myself as an
> example, I own some python modules that may certainly be better without
> disttag,

python on different Fedoras have different ABIs and different module
installation paths, so even if a python noarch module you have to
rebuild python modules from FC6 (2.4) to F7 (2.5).

> but I also have C/C++ stuff that, although stable and unfrequently
> updated are certainly better with a disttag.
-- 
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/20070605/d2b71c38/attachment.sig>