From: Justin Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/issues/39#note_547944992

kernel-5.11.0-155
kernel-5.11.0-156
kernel-5.11.0-157
kernel-5.11.0-158


These are tags by an autogenerated by scripts and have nothing to do
with dist-git because most of them were not used. Of those, only
kernel-5.11.0-155 was built for rawhide, with an extra build of 156 for
F34. The rest of them were never in dist-git at all.  `<N>` does
distinguish the actual tag applied and is useful there. The date is
useful in being able to quickly see when a build was last done, or more
importantly to distinguish quickly if a script failed and ark-latest
does not have a valid new build. As we build rawhide almost daily, and
in the morning, I can tell you what I build in dist-git today was in
Linus' tree yesterday most of the time.  There is a 1 day difference in
most cases. It is static, and as a maintainer it is much more useful as
a representation of when the tree was built vs when linus handled a pull
request.  Remember, this date doesn't necessarily correlate with when I
generate dist-git so much as when ark-latest is composed in practice. It
has happened several times that I don't get to a build until the next
day, but before the script runs.  By the time that finishes koji, it
looks like a fresh build, but it is probably time to start the next one
because that was older.  Developers are doing various things from os-
build, but from a maintainer standpoint, dist-git is only generated from
ark-latest.


As to whether `<N>` remains where it is, or is moved to between the 0
and rc, I just don't care all that much.  The reasons for keeping it at
the end are, it seems more logical with the build number being at the
end, as versioning gets more granular from left to right.  It also falls
into the "if it ain't broke" category in that it has been there for a
good 10 years now, and I don't see any particular advantage to changing
it.  But in the end, it doesn't really make a ton of difference to me.
Perhaps some of the ELN developers and maintainers would have stronger
opinions there as they have a *lot* more tooling around completed builds
than Fedora does.
_______________________________________________
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Reply via email to