[Fedora-packaging] Exception for JPackage

[fnasser at redhat.com]

Quoting Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger at gmail.com>:

> On Thu, 2007-02-01 at 23:30 +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
>> On Thursday 01 February 2007 16:50, Fernando Nasser wrote:
>> > Ville Skyttä wrote:
>> >
>> > > JPackage's pre-release Release: tags are not Xjpp only.  Was this
>> > > considered in the draft?  Some random examples:
>> > >
>> > > classpathx-jaxp-1.0-0.beta1.10jpp
>> > > cpptasks-1.0-0.b4.1jpp
>> > > cryptix-asn1-0.1.12-0.cvs20011119.7jpp
>> > > activemq3-3.2.5-0.r1125.2jpp
>> > > radeox-0.9-0.beta.2jpp
>> > >
>> > > More at http://mirrors.dotsrc.org/jpackage/1.7/generic/free/repodata/
>> >
>> > These are old style tags, before Nicolas brought up the possible
>> > problems with upgrade paths.
>>
>> My point wasn't about whether they're 0.foo.Xjpp or 0.1.foo.Xjpp, 
>> but that the
>> draft says:
>>
>>     "JPackage RPMS only use integers in the Release: field,
>>      in the format Xjpp"
>>
>> Note: 0.foo.Xjpp is not in the Xjpp format, neither is 0.X.foo.Yjpp.  For
>> example, 1jpp and 15jpp are.
>>
>> The draft goes on and says "If this is the case, then ..." and discusses how
>> to take care of stuff.  I just want to make sure the discussion is not based
>> on a false assumption.  I *guess* pre-release names like that are not a
>> problem, but haven't read the draft too thoroughly to be able to tell at the
>> moment.
>>
> Here's an attempt to resolve this::
>
> When a jpackage package uses a prerelease, use %{fedora prerelease
> scheme}.Xjpp.%{rest of fedora release} where Xjpp is the integer+"jpp"
> portion of the jpackage release tag.  Example:
>  cpptasks-1.0-0.b4.1jpp => cpptasks-1.0-0.1.b4.1jpp.fc6[OPTIONAL .INT]
>
> When a jpackage package uses the same prerelease scheme as Fedora, this
> will allow interleaving:
>  cpptasks-1.0-0.1.b4.1jpp => cpptasks-1.0-0.1.b4.1jpp.fc6.1
>
> If the jpackage does not there can be breakage but it's not expected
> that this case will arise.  The important thing is for the packagers to
> realize that the only thing coming from the jpackage tag is 1jpp.  Doing
> this will help catch problems if someone wants to import a JPackage with
> this old version scheme or a JPackage that has a buggy version string.
>
> -Toshio
>


Hi Toshio,

The new upstream JPackage scheme for pre-releases is actually based on the
Fedora pre-release scheme and it is fully compatible with Fedora.  
Actually you
seem to have guessed it right above:

xxxxx-1.0-0.X.<pre-release-tag-from-upstream>.Yjpp

where X = 1, 2, 3... and is incremented whenever the package is updated 
to a new
pre-release tag.  Rebuilds of the same sources increment the Y.

Note that CVS and SVN date tags have now been changed to follow the 
same Fedora
rule:

YYYYMMDDcvs  or   YYYYMMDDsvn


Also, as the Jpackage 1.7 release is not yet final, all the packages that have
wrong pre-release tags will be rebuilt.  (Note: there is a slim possibility
that Epoch must be raised for some package, but hopefully not).


Regards,
Fernando