Re: Outrageous Maintainer

[Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>]

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