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

Re: Breaking deps deliberately



On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 23:34 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > Btw, the F-10 update would have had a higher %release than the F-11
> > update (1.0.21-4.fc10 > 1.0.21-3.fc11).
> 
> Sigh, why do people keep doing this instead of using proper 3.fc10.1
> versioning? Deliberate breaking of upgrade paths also needs to be banned!

I didn't know about this until this subthread... and I asked a rather
senior packaging person about it some months ago and didn't get this
information.  So I think this is poorly publicized; and perhaps poorly
positioned in the packaging guidelines.

That said, is there a reason the update system shouldn't enforce this?
That is, why allow an update to F-(n-1) that's greater than the current
package in F-n (or devel)?

-- 
Braden McDaniel <braden endoframe com>


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