Lamar Owen wrote: > On Thursday 04 March 2004 10:28 pm, Tom Lane wrote: > > There were no code-change differences in this rewrap, so I see no real > > need to change the version number. > > > The lesson I'd prefer to see us take away from this is that Marc needs > > to automate his release wrapping process more. These sorta mistakes > > shouldn't have happened in the first place ... > > There are now multiple copies of 7.3.6 out there. How is a body to know which > one to use? On RPMs, as you well now, SOP is to increment the release on any > change, including a typo. This way there is no ambiguity. > > This is not the first time tarballs have been streamlined. I'm glad I hadn't > built any RPMs yet.
My guess is that the packaging scripts are adjusted for new releases, but then don't work perfectly for older ones. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
