[CentOS-devel] Latest builds are now online 2014-06-25_build 4

Wed Jul 2 14:48:15 UTC 2014
Morten Stevens <mstevens at fedoraproject.org>

2014-07-02 16:35 GMT+02:00 Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at 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 at 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,