Re: Outrageous Maintainer
On Sun, May 01, 2005 at 12:38:41AM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 06:45:26PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > But you remove the package from testing doesn't mean we won't have
> > users with it installed since it was present there so, IMHO, the
> > Conflict is need.
>
> The bug is in the other package, packages are not required to work
> around other bugs in other packages, that'd be a gigantic mess of
> workarounds. If dash breaks using my package for whatever reason, I'm
> not going to add a conflict: dash (with non-fixed version or whatever),
> dash needs to fix it.
>
> Ditto here, and the fix is removing the package.
That's a pretty maintainer-centric view.
For your _users_, it doesn't matter which of the packages was "guilty" -
and a Conflicts is cheap.
See e.g. #218717 and #220983 for examples where the other packages was
technically wrong, but a Conflicts in libc6 was the only possible
solution.
I hope you agree that a Conflicts in a non-"guilty" package is better
than email loss for your users?
> --Jeroen
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
Reply to: