RPM version goes backward in Rawhide

[Dennis Gilmore]

On Tuesday, July 26, 2011 03:24:58 PM Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 7/26/11 1:14 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > Yes, It got untagged. See last week's thread on this list:
> > Subject: rpm builds failing with "Installed (but unpackaged) file(s)
> > found"
> 
> I thought there was a hard rule about not having nvrs go backwards, and
> if a bad build was put out, it should be fixed with epoch or other such
> NVR things to make sure the upgrade path continues.  (that is once a
> build makes it out in the nightly repos)

I untagged the rpm build and we do have that rule, I could have sworn that it 
had only been built that day and not made it into rawhide. if i had realised 
that it had made it to rawhide i would have bumped the epoch on the old build 
to ensure that updating was correctly handled.

Dennis
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20110728/fecaf5c5/attachment.bin