[Bug 607584] Review Request: wordgroupz - A vocabulary building application

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=607584

--- Comment #21 from Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp> 2010-10-15 14:57:00 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> SPEC Url : http://rtnpro.fedorapeople.org/Packages/SPECS/wordgroupz.spec
> SRPM url:
> http://rtnpro.fedorapeople.org/Packages/SRPMS/wordgroupz-0.3-3.fc13.src.rpm
> 
> I have updated wordgroupz code a bit. I got rid of the python-nltk dependency.
> I extracted only the code required for accessing wordnet dictionary from
> python-nltk. So will this new update be considered as a post release? In the
> Naming Guidelines, the naming format of post releases is given to be
> %{X}.%{posttag}. But if I change the wordgroupz version number from 0.3 to
> 0.3.1, then do I still require postag?
> 
> Or will %{release-number}%{?dist} will suffice for the Release field?

Well, what is pre-release or post-release is actually what
the upstream (in this case you).
- If you once released 0.3 and then released 0.3a, then 0.3a is a
  post-release of 0.3, and when using 0.3a tarball for rpm,
  you should use "0.3-%{X}.a%{?dist}" for EVR.

- But in this case you released 0.3a before releasing 0.3. In that case
  you should use "0.3-0.%{X}.a%{?dist}" for EVR
  (so please chanage %changelog: Correct one is:
----------------------------------------------------------
 Fri Jul 23 2010 rtnpro <rtnpro at gmail.com> 0.3-0.1.b
 - Release version 0.3b
----------------------------------------------------------
  )

And if you release 0.3.1, you don't have to use %{alphatag}
or %{posttag}, and you can use 0.3.1-%{X}%{?dist} for EVR.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.