[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: to bump or not to bump

On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 02:27:18PM +0200, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
> Hello
>    I would like to hear some more opinions on the subject described in  
> the thread started by  
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481601#c6. My opinion is  
> expressed in comment #9 and I am quite sure that any future update of  
> the rawhide version might introduce the exact same problem again. I  
> could, of course, keep using always the same release tag as in the  
> corresponding rawhide version, but it looks a bit odd to me. Are there  
> any guidelines on the subject of the correspondence of  release numbers  
> between epel and rawhide ?

First, I think that the exact same guidelines should apply to fedora
rawhide versus fedora releases.

Then I think that it is better to sync releases when this really 
corresponds with the same package (same version, same functionality), 
and helps versionned requires. However, I don't think that bumps and 
builds should be done only for that. In the case at hand, the build
should still be in epel testing, so a bump and a rebuild would
do no harm and help requires, so I think it is fine to do it -- at
least when there is a known case where it helps requires.

In the end I don't think that this should be a guideline, more something 
that is left to the packager. So if you think that it is pointless to
try to sync with the rawhide releases, you shouldn't do the bump and 


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]