Re: Emacsen intermediate step proposal.

[Brian White <bcwhite@verisim.com>]

> > Perhaps having a non-clean install of emacs19 would be worth it to save
> > problems with other packages the already declare dependancies on emacs.
> 
> No.  Things are about to change a *lot* in the various emacsen
> packages.  I think Mark, James, and I have come up with a way to
> support simultaneous install of all the flavors, while maintaining the
> flexibility that the maintainers of the more complex emacs add-on
> packages need.  I'm implementing it now to make sure it works, and
> I'll post a proposal soon just to make sure that it satisfies all the
> other maintainer's needs.

I count 27 packages that depend, recommend, or suggest emacs.  All of
these are going to break unless you provide the virtual package of "emacs".

I think 27 packages outweighs approx. 2 packages of emacs.


> Because of the changes, I'm fairly certain that all of the package
> that have emacs dependencies are going to have to upload new versions
> anyway, so changing one line in their control files will be the least
> of the issues.

I disagree.  Many of them just require an executable called "emacs".  Not
all of them will require changes.


It's not that I'm against the proposal.  I'm just trying to minimize the
impact on the system.  We've seen in the past how difficult it is to get
a number of packages changed to conform to something new.  I think the
impact will be less overall if we can stick with the virtual package name
"emacs".

                                          Brian
                                 ( bcwhite@verisim.com )

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In theory, theory and practice are the same.  In practice, they're not.



--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .