Description of problem: This package does not include a dist tag (e.g. '.fc23') in its release field, even though it is mandatory according the packaging guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:DistTag Our automated testing efforts are beginning to rely on having a dist tag in RPM file names: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/2015-June/thread.html#10693 Please adjust the package spec file and add '%{?dist}' at the end of the release field. Do this for all supported Fedora releases. It is not necessary to build a new package version immediately, but it should be prepared in the spec file so that a new package build in the future will contain the dist tag. Thank you. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): ivtv-firmware-2:20080701-26.noarch
This is a firmware package. There's nothing but a blob in it. The same package can be used for every Fedora, RHEL, CentOS, etc. There's absolutely no reason this package should have a dist tag. Your tests are broken if a dist tag is strictly required, imo.
You can read the discussion, we're trying to make use of the fact that dist tag is mandatory to optimize the test execution time. If it turns out to not work for us, we will do it differently. Nevertheless, the dist tag is still mandatory according to the guidelines, regardless of our test efforts (it was made mandatory 6 months earlier). If you think it's not a good idea, please start a discussion on the packaging mailing list. IIUIC, the dist tag just denotes which fedora release the package was built against, but does not preclude installation on other fedora releases or even other distributions. So while you might see it unnecessary, it should not affect the use cases you mentioned even if you add it. Is that correct?
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 23 development cycle. Changing version to '23'. (As we did not run this process for some time, it could affect also pre-Fedora 23 development cycle bugs. We are very sorry. It will help us with cleanup during Fedora 23 End Of Life. Thank you.) More information and reason for this action is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Fedora23
Why is here such a resistance to using the dist tag? I don't understand it. Does it negatively affect the package somehow? Does it complicate maintenance for you in same way?
There's no resistance to disttag. It just makes no sense for this package. It shouldn't be built again, and this bug has been sitting here with no intention of anyone actually working on it. It's better to just close the bug.