Re: RFC: some new deb package flag: "upgrade-conflicts"
On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 09:21:20AM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 10:27:22AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > The upgrade path from oldstable to stable+1 is to upgrade to stable first.
> > There is no justification to place unnecessary workload on package
> > maintainers just to save users from taking this step.
> Problem is, that users *will* do stuff like this, and supporting it is
> easy if each upgrade step can parse the output from the previous step.
Users will do a lot of foolish things, including downgrading packages, which
we cannot efficiently support.
> I've seen this topic on IRC quite often, and the consensus was that it
> should be supported if at all possible.
What matters is how much benefit there is for the user, compared to how much
effort is required on the part of the developer. If it is easy, I see no
reason not to do it. If it is not easy, then I see no reason to bother.