On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 12:17:48PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Axel Thimm (Axel.Thimm(a)physik.fu-berlin.de) said:
> I'll also go with your suggestion, Rex. I'd call it the "it's
written
> rh10, but it is pronounced Fedora Core 1" idiom ...
Now that's just patently misleading. It's *not* Red Hat Linux 10,
it's Fedora Core 1. It's a shift in the development model, shifts
in the goals of the release, and more. Hence, the new name, and
new version.
> By bumping all epochs of "Fedora Core" to ensure
> upgradability, and maintaining unnecessary multiple specfiles?
Huh? We aren't bumping all epochs of Fedora Core packages, and
we don't have to to maintain upgradeability.
> The alternative is to drop support for upgrading from RH <= 9 to FC,
> which is even uglier.
Uprgrades work... there were a couple hiccups in the test release,
but by the time of the final release, I do believe there will only
be epochs added to indexhtml and comps.
I think you lost the context, maybe I should have but Fedora Legacy in
the subject.
It is not about Fedora Core, where the affected packages are only a
few, but for Fedora Lagacy projects, which will host the same package
in different Legacy repos and will have to ensure upgradability.
--
Axel.Thimm(a)physik.fu-berlin.de