fedora release name problem

[John.Florian at dart.biz]

> From: Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com>
> 
> On 19/03/13 08:30 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> >
> > On 19 Mar 2013 14:33, <John.Florian at dart.biz
> > <mailto:John.Florian at dart.biz>> wrote:
> >  >
> >  > > From: "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones at redhat.com
> > <mailto:rjones at redhat.com>>
> >  > >
> >  > > An interesting question is:  Why don't we try out the new release 
name
> >  > > early on in Rawhide.  ie. we would change the release name now to
> >  > > whatever F20 is going to be + " (Rawhide)".  Wouldn't that give 
us a
> >  > > lot more time to test and fix?
> >  >
> >  > That seems like a great idea ... and it also adds in a test for
> > handling parenthesis.  I can't imagine how they'd pose a problem, but
> > clearly nobody foresaw this train coming either.
> >
> > Err the fedora 19 voting for names started around the release of F18
> > alpha. Its been set as this for around 6 months already, I suspect its
> > only become an issue with people starting to create images etc.
> 
> It isn't applied anywhere till branch. Rawhide always uses the release 
> name 'Rawhide'. Even though it's voted on a long way ahead of time, the 
> new release name is only applied in the tree at branch time. Several 
> people were using Rawhide considerably in advance of branching - 
> including myself - and the problems showed up right when we branched and 

> the new fedora-release package was rolled.

Ah, that makes sense.  I had no idea how feasible name + " (Rawhide)" 
would be, I just liked the idea.

--
John Florian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20130319/92b9057e/attachment.html>