kernel-source vs. kernel-sourcecode (please revert)

[Dax Kelson]

On Tue, 2004-06-15 at 19:13 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 11:05:11AM -0600, Dax Kelson wrote:
> > > tree updates come from, and remain stable at all times. That avoids double
> > > work an missed bugfixes
> > 
> > Having kernel-source become noarch is a non-issue from the impact on
> > ISVs. The renaming is the problem.
> 
> I rather not have renamed it either, however the impact should have been
> low; only people who want to build their entire new kernel use
> kernel-source (or should). Yum now can at least get to the new package,
> which was the sole reason for the rename (well together with up2date)

So it is doable to push out new yum and up2date, and then go back to the
old, standard, kernel-source name for the next kernel release?

This will save ISVs, VARs, and RH much pain long term.

Dax Kelson
Guru Labs