[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Outrageous Maintainer

On 1 May 2005, at 8:53 am, Wouter Verhelst wrote:

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

There'll be lots of workarounds, but that doesn't necessarily equate to
'a mess'.

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.

True. However, it does no harm to add the conflicts, while it does make
it easier for your users. When presented with a bug in another package
that completely breaks mine (rather than the entire system), usually I
do add the conflicts: header.

I think that's a dangerous thing to do. When the bug in the other package is fixed, the chances are that you won't know about it, and then you'll end up with two packages which conflict with each other for no reason. In this case, that's fair enough, because they're two variants of the same thing, but I don't think this sort of thing should be done in the general case.


Dr Tim Cutts
GPG: 1024/D FC81E159 5BA6 8CD4 2C57 9824 6638  C066 16E2 F4F5 FC81 E159

Reply to: