On disttags (was: Choosing rpm-release for fc1 and fdr add-on rpms)
Alexandre Oliva
aoliva at redhat.com
Fri May 14 08:32:54 UTC 2004
On May 14, 2004, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net> wrote:
> On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 09:28:00PM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 01:51:56AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> Frankly, I don't see the point of disttags for the core packages.
>> [...] when are they useful for packages in the Core?
> o for first it will certainly not hurt at all.
> o it will enable the cousing fedoralegacy to have clean backbuilds.
> o it will enable Red Hat to have decent common errata for multiple
> non-EOLed releases.
> o it will enable rawhide to have good upgrade paths for unchanged
> packages, e.g. bump the disttag from fc1.90 to fc1.91 to rebuild all
> packages for test2.
> o it will provide a coherent specification for Red Hat and third party
> repos to use. Asking of repos to change/apply vereioning specs w/o
> Red Hat to follow is not going to work.
> o there will be no more big threads about disttags w/o a resolution :)
You seem to have good points. I'm convinced. Unfortunately, I have
no say on what happens to Fedora Core packages, other than what I talk
developers into doing by filing bug reports in bugzilla :-)
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list