kernel-3.9.0-0.rc5.git1.301.fc19 and naming

[Justin M. Forbes]

On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 09:33 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 10:20:20 -0400,
>    Josh Boyer <jwboyer at redhat.com> wrote:
> >On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 09:12:28AM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> >> Are rawhide and nodebug kernels going to start using 4xx numbering
> >> to stay ahead of the f19 kernels now that they are using 3xx
> >> numbering?
> >
> >Hm.  I think when the numbering scheme went into place, inheritance
> >between rawhide and Branched still existed.  Now that it doesn't, we
> >need to either do what you ask about, or always make sure the actual
> >Version of rawhide is newer (so a newer git snapshot, rc, whatever).
> 
> Even with inheritence, since there have been f20 kernel builds it wouldn't 
> apply.
> 
> I think having the same style numbering for all of the kernels has some 
> visual appeal. It feels odd (to me) looking at both rawhide kernel versions 
> and released kernel versions currently. So if it isn't extra work, I 
> have a preference for consistant naming.
> 
> The other option would be not to use Yxx numbering for development kernels 
> and make sure that rawhide and branched get builds at the same time. The 
> next git bump will be enough to make the use of 301 for f19 once 
> irrelevant.

When we had discussed this before, we said that rawhide builds would
stay with 1.  The reasoning behind this was to ensure that people who
installed rawhide builds to get support for some new feature or device
could easily move to their branch once that kernel was released.
Generally speaking rawhide stays ahead of F19 at this point simply
because of the overhead in the bodhi process for F19.
Using the 301 series for F19 is important because the whole point is
preserving an upgrade path, but yeah, I supposed that doesn't need to
actually happen until 3.9 is released since F17 and F18 won't get 3.9
before that point.  I will drop the F19 releases back to 1 until 3.9 is
out of rc.

Justin