Feels to me like even if the package has no changes it's 'different' than upstream and should have the label + appropriate coment somewhere in the README. On 11/2/07, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org> wrote: > > Maciej Żenczykowski wrote: > > I think for the future the packaged should be releases el5_0.centos > > built against 5.0 tree, and then when 5.1 is available, rebuilt as el5_1 > > against the 5.1 tree. > > We thought about this at the time, however that would cause more > confusion we felt. the '.centos' bit is added only when there is a > change in the sources from upstream. I suppose we can revisit the policy > should this kind of a thing become more common in the future. > > -- > Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522219 at icq > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20071102/5b0e5488/attachment-0007.html>