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

Re: virtual packages `pinentry' and `pinentry-x11'



Re: Tatsuya Kinoshita 2006-07-29 <20060729.200402.167467225.tats%nobody@tats.iris.ne.jp>
> Should `pinentry' and `pinentry-x11' be added to the list of
> virtual package names?
> 
> I've discovered that the virtual package `pinentry' is provided by
> pinentry-curses, pinentry-gtk, pinentry-gtk2 and pinentry-qt, and
> the virtual package `pinentry-x11' is provided by pinentry-gtk,
> pinentry-gtk2 and pinentry-qt, but `pinentry' and `pinentry-x11'
> are not found in the list of virtual package names.

Policy: 3.6. Virtual packages

     All packages should use virtual package names where appropriate, and
     arrange to create new ones if necessary.  They should not use virtual
     package names (except privately, amongst a cooperating group of
     packages) unless they have been agreed upon and appear in the list of
     virtual package names.

I think pinentry* is a clear case of a "cooperating group of packages".

The policy could be updated though on what "privately" means.

Christoph
-- 
cb@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: