Hi,I hereby call for a vote on the following ballot. Unless a TC member objects to calling for a vote, voting lasts for a week, or until the result is no longer in doubt.
===RationaleThere are two "rename" programs - the perl rename, and the util-linux rename. Debian and its derivatives have shipped the perl rename as /usr/bin/rename, whilst other distributions (e.g. Fedora) have shipped the util-linux rename thus. The two implementations are incompatible. Users might reasonably desire both implementations to be available on the same system; they are designed to meet different needs.
Backwards-compatibility (and the lack of a compelling argument that rename from util-linux should replace perl rename) means that /usr/bin/rename in Debian should remain the perl rename.
Prior to bullseye, util-linux's rename was shipped as /usr/bin/rename.ul; Debian's users who wish to use util-linux's rename will expect it to be in this location.
===End Rationale ===Begin Resolution AThe Technical Committee overrides the util-linux maintainer, and requires that util-linux's rename should be shipped as /usr/bin/rename.ul in a binary package built from src:util-linux. The package containing rename.ul must not conflict with the rename package nor divert /usr/bin/rename.
===End Resolution A ===Begin Resolution BThe Technical Committee overrides the util-linux maintainer, and requires that util-linux's rename should be shipped in a binary package built from src:util-linux. If this package Conflicts with the rename package, then it must not contain any other binaries.
===End Resolution B ===Begin Resolution N None of the above ===End Resolution N I vote A > B > N Regards, Matthew
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature