On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 01:47:48PM -0500, Jonathan Yu wrote:
Hi Jonas, On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Jonas Smedegaard <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 12:35:34PM -0500, Jonathan Yu wrote:So for the latter two groups of modules, I'm just suggesting they require the actual package directly (rather than the one Provided by libemail-mime-perl)Please include fallback for the old package names too, to ease backporting, like this:Depends: libemail-mime-perl (>= 1.863) | libemail-mime-creator-perlReplace version number with the actual package where things got merged. Please note how the Debian part of the version number is deliberately left out. That was also to ease backporting. If the actual merge (for some odd reason) did not happen at an upstream release, then include the Debian part but in a backports-friendly way like this: 1.863-5~When the functionality is provided by the main package even in oldstable, the fallback can be dropped.That's a really good point, I didn't think of that. Yes, that definitely sounds like something we should do (where we have control); I'll also suggest it in any wishlist bugs I file asking maintainers to switch over.If we go with this scheme, does this mean we can still drop the Provides: eventually?
Oh, yes, I totally forgot the underlying reason for this: Yes, the whole Provides: can be dropped when no packages in unstable, testing or stable depends only on the old names (which ideally means at the same time as the fallbacks).
- Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Description: Digital signature