2014-07-02 16:35 GMT+02:00 Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org:
On 07/02/2014 03:30 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 4:52 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
On 07/02/2014 10:38 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
I am less opposed to these as they retain some semblance of a correlation to upstream 7.0, although presumably any release would now be .1407 rather than .1406 as we are now into July?
no it wont, we use the tag that matches upstream's release stamp, so will stay 1406
This is a great example of why the date scheme is much better than the old one - it clearly reflects the state of code inside the release.
What would that date actually reflect? The last change from upstream, the date of the matching upstream release, or the CentOS release date?
As i said, it would refleft ( as it does not ) the code age, and not a centos release.
I think what people want is to keep it closely tied to the upstream identification.
yes, which is what this achieves.
No, it doesn't. Close to upstream means 7.0 and not 7-0-core-1406.
CentOS 7.0 will reflect RHEL 7.0 codebase / code age. Based on upstream.
CentOS 7-0-core-1406 will confuse many people.
Best regards,
Morten