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

Re: "Obsoletes:" tag, and "alpha-beta-rc" naming convention

Thank you Rodrigo, Sean:

> >     Obsoletes: foo = 1.0alpha1, foo = 1.0alpha2, foo = 1.0beta1, foo = 1.0beta2
> > Am I doing something wrong ? Is this documented ? Help would be
> > appreciated, I need to release a "rc" of a package I maintain soon.
> Check the Epoch tag. It's the only way you can solve this problem.
> Except, of course, to choose better names.

Yes, Sean pointed out pretty much in the same direction(better names). 
Thank you for the pointers.  I played with the Epoch tag,
with partial success (or failure depending how you see it :-)

I have a "make rpm" Makefile target in my package, and 
I failed to get automatic building that would satisfy
the usual notation ("1.0_beta1", etc) and RPM at the same
time :-)

So I decided to stick to a numeric convention for releases.

In the end, it would be great if we could agree with a 
clear standard for Open Source releases, and adapt RPM
to it. To me, OpenOffice-1.0_beta1
is more indicative of what it is than OpenOffice-0.91_beta, or
OpenOffice-1.0-0.distro.1.beta.xxx.rpm for that sake. 

But I am sure this has been debated to death, so I'll leave
it here :-). Thanks so much folks.

-- Leo

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