Feels to me like even if the package has no changes it&#39;s &#39;different&#39; than upstream and should have the label + appropriate coment somewhere in the README.<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 11/2/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">
Karanbir Singh</b> &lt;<a href="mailto:mail-lists@karan.org">mail-lists@karan.org</a>&gt; wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Maciej Żenczykowski wrote:<br>&gt; I think for the future the packaged should be releases el5_0.centos<br>&gt; built against 5.0 tree, and then when 5.1 is available, rebuilt as el5_1<br>&gt; against the 5.1 tree.<br><br>
We thought about this at the time, however that would cause more<br>confusion we felt. the &#39;.centos&#39; bit is added only when there is a<br>change in the sources from upstream. I suppose we can revisit the policy<br>
should this kind of a thing become more common in the future.<br><br>--<br>Karanbir Singh : <a href="http://www.karan.org/">http://www.karan.org/</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;: 2522219@icq<br>_______________________________________________<br>CentOS-devel mailing list
<br><a href="mailto:CentOS-devel@centos.org">CentOS-devel@centos.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel">http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel</a><br></blockquote></div><br>