On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 02:27:18PM +0200, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
I would like to hear some more opinions on the subject described in
the thread started by
. My opinion is
expressed in comment #9 and I am quite sure that any future update of
the rawhide version might introduce the exact same problem again. I
could, of course, keep using always the same release tag as in the
corresponding rawhide version, but it looks a bit odd to me. Are there
any guidelines on the subject of the correspondence of release numbers
between epel and rawhide ?
First, I think that the exact same guidelines should apply to fedora
rawhide versus fedora releases.
Then I think that it is better to sync releases when this really
corresponds with the same package (same version, same functionality),
and helps versionned requires. However, I don't think that bumps and
builds should be done only for that. In the case at hand, the build
should still be in epel testing, so a bump and a rebuild would
do no harm and help requires, so I think it is fine to do it -- at
least when there is a known case where it helps requires.
In the end I don't think that this should be a guideline, more something
that is left to the packager. So if you think that it is pointless to
try to sync with the rawhide releases, you shouldn't do the bump and