use disttag ".1" for devel to avoid confusion

[Christopher Aillon]

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> 
> On 04.06.2007 16:13, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> Brian Pepple wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2007-06-04 at 14:42 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Jun 03, 2007 at 11:08:23AM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
>>>>> /topic RELENG-Meeting - Freeze Policy - JesseKeating
>>>> I would suggest to consider at least one full rebuild [1] before the
>>>> final freeze (e.g. as part of the pre-freeze process) and of course to
>>>> allow for enough time between the freeze and the GA to shake out any
>>>> bugs that will surface by that process.
>>> This is on FESCo's schedule to discuss after F7 was released.
>> Note that this has caused mass confusion as I thought it would. It is 
>> not just about technical requirements.
> 
> The idea to use ".1" as disstag for devel (discusses weeks ago) still
> stands.
> 
> The idea in short: x.1 is higher then x.fc7 and avoid the confusion if a
> package doesn't get rebuild during a devel cycle; and if there later is
> a update after releases x simply gets increased -- so there would no
> need to got for "x.2".
> 
> I can outline the idea further if anybody is interested.

This is trying to work around a perceived problem by inventing a new 
problem.

I've seen bugs filed on packagers for not using the disttag before.  We 
should not encourage disttag everywhere, only where it makes sense.  If 
packages don't get updated once between releases, maybe the disttag is 
not useful for that package and it's usage ought to be _dis_couraged in 
this situation.