fedora-legacy agrees to enforce rpm upgrades? (was: Warren's Package Naming Proposal - Revision 1)

[Jesse Keating]

On Friday 07 November 2003 13:17, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> There was some support for moving/keeping non-numeric upstream
> post-release version parts in %{version} instead of moving them into
> %{release}, what is the consensus on that now?

Please see Warren Togami's naming scheme proposal.  Unless otherwise 
opposed, Fedora Legacy will adopt this naming scheme and move forward 
with it.

-- 
Jesse Keating RHCE MCSE (geek.j2solutions.net)
Fedora Legacy Team      (www.fedora.us/wiki/FedoraLegacy)
Mondo DevTeam           (www.mondorescue.org)
GPG Public Key          (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)
 
Was I helpful?  Let others know:
 http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=jkeating
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: signature
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20031107/a13fdc06/attachment-0002.bin