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

Re: rawhide report: 20070108 changes



Dave Jones schrieb:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 08:15:10AM -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
>  > On Tuesday 09 January 2007 02:22, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>  > > If I would review the kernel for the extras merge I'd say "fix this".
>  > > But I suspect davej won't like to call the kernels 2.6.20 (e.g.
>  > > 2.6.20-1.2906.rc4.fc7 for example) before they are actually 2.6.20.
>  > > This will be one of the problem areas we'll probably have to deal with
>  > > when it comes to reviewing Core packages for the Extras merge.
>  > Personally, I'm all for giving the kernel a pass on this and some of the 
>  > other... interesting things in the spec.  That is, unless the reviewer not 
>  > only complains about something in the spec, but also produces a viable rework 
>  > of what the spec is trying to accomplish.  The kernel is one of our speshul 
>  > packages that really does need some special consideration.
> Really.  And if you want to do something useful with the kernel package,
> there's no shortage of real bugs that need fixing.

There are guidelines for packaging. They contain a standard for naming
pre-release packages. The kernel package clearly is violating it as the
version of the kernel is in fact 2.6.20-rc4, but the %version is 2.6.19.
Can we agree so far?

Okay, next step: Are you asking us to ignore that during the review for
the merge? BTW, sure, we can't fix each and every detail of a complex
package like the kernel-one. But the wrong pre-relase-version one is
fixed easily and I think that actually why we do the big review for the
merge.

CU
thl


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