Package EVR problems in Fedora 2013-01-12

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 02:53:06 +0000
"Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones at redhat.com> wrote:

> When I did the big OCaml codegen fix/update in F18 recently, I just
> bumped these package versions in Rawhide, merged the change back to
> F18, and rebuilt them only in F18.  The upshot is that these aren't
> really a problem now and will fix themselves through routine updates
> over time.

Why not build them in rawhide? The codegen fix went in sooner there?

Note that in the future to avoid this: 

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Minor_release_bumps_for_old_branches

Personally, I'd say just rebuild them in rawhide, since people yum
upgrading from f18 would hit this and rawhide doesn't mind rebuilds. :) 

kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20130111/c70b53c6/attachment.sig>