to bump or not to bump

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 03.02.2009 13:27, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
>     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'd tend to agree with some of what the reported outlines, but I'd say 
it's not important enough to justify a rebuild.

> 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. 

For me it's not odd; I'd even say it's the natural thing to do.

Rawhide is the main "devel branch" for the spec file itself -- the 
version-release of the spec file for me is like a verison number of a 
regular software. Version numbers don't go backwards; thus if I'd (kind 
of) fork a spec file by picking it from rawhide and using it for another 
branch (EPEL in this case) then I'd normally leave the version-release 
as it is as long as %dist gets used in %release.

But if maintainers in Rawhide and EPEL are different then I'd want to be 
on the safe site and would add a ".1" to %release and "rebuild for EPEL" 
to the changelog -- then it's obvious where this spec file exactly comes 
from and how they relate to each other -- that might be important to 
know for users and packagers.

CU
knurd