[Fedora-packaging] Conflicts Draft Proposal Round 2

Tom 'spot' Callaway tcallawa at redhat.com
Tue Jan 16 21:00:09 UTC 2007

On Tue, 2007-01-16 at 15:40 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 January 2007 14:45, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
> > As discussed in today's FPC meeting, I've made some changes to the
> > Conflicts Draft Proposal to document some acceptable cases, add some
> > additional valid file name conflict workarounds, and fix the wording
> > here and there.
> >
> > FPC Members: Please vote on this draft via email, so we can get this in
> > place well before the Core/Extras merge. As I wrote the draft, I vote
> > +1. ;)
> >
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Conflicts
> It was brought up that since RHEL is based on Fedora releases, and RHEL does 
> crazy things like support RHEL3 to RHEL5 upgrades, it is reasonable to have 
> conflicts information in a Fedora package that dates a little farther back 
> than the latest supported Fedora release, since we're trying to use these 
> packages and guidelines for RHEL too.

No, actually, RHEL doesn't support v3 -> v5 upgrades afaik. At least,
RHEL has never previously supported upgrades across more than one major


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list