bad use of "Dist Tag" in some packages of rawhide

[Michael Schwendt]

On Sat, 02 Nov 2013 19:39:38 +0100, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:

> Kevin Kofler wrote:
> 
> > Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
> >> BAD use of %{dist} tag(75):
> >> ==========================
> >> afpfs-ng-0.8.1-13.fc21.3.src.rpm 13.fc21.3
> > [and many similar examples]
> > 
> > NOTABUG: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Minor_release_bumps_for_old_branches
> > (the next paragraph right after the one you linked to).
> 
> _rawhide_ is not an *old branch* . And it never was.
> 
> To have {?dist}.X in rawhide should be impossible.
> 
> It breaks the laws of thermodynamics!!

It looks ugly, but it's harmless.

It's the package maintainer's responsibility to _reset_ the Release tag in
Rawhide when upgrading the Version or when touching the package.

With the example of afpfs-ng, look what has happened here:

  http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=8023

Two minor release bumps have been kept, have survived several mass-rebuilds,
because the bump-script does not mess with the Release tag, and even in
a later update by a packager a week ago, the ".3" has not been dropped.

If anyone feels like adding an option to rpmdev-bumpspec, that one could
attempt at cleaning up Release tags -- but note that even least-significant
stuff right of the dist tag could be wanted by the package owner(s), so
simply dropping it might be wrong. E.g. sometimes it's a patchlevel number,
with no "pl" prefix.