A silly question about our "FC" tag

[Michael Schwendt]

On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 07:18:27 -0800, Jesse wrote:

> If we did a macro change in dist-f13 and a mass rebuild, and did a macro
> change on dist-f12 and dist-f11 at the same time (without a mass
> rebuild) this might work. 

Only with severe discipline by all packagers who push updates to
multiple branches.

The X%{?dist}.Y scenario is affected, too, for example:

  $ rpmdev-vercmp 0 1.0 3.fc12.1    0 1.0 3.f12.2
  0:1.0-3.fc12.1 is newer

Plus: Changing %dist would open the door for new cvs/koji tags that could
be created without bumping the rest of %release, creating package EVRs
which lose version comparison. Also in Obsoletes/Conflicts/Requires -- and
since %dist is appended to %release, we do have %dist in those tags if
packagers used %release in them.

> I'm not sure I like dist value changing on a
> released Fedora though.

If there were an automated sanity check somewhere as part of the pkg
release procedure, that might help. It would enforce proper %release
bumps.