On Mon, 2014-03-24 at 16:48 -0300, Pablo Lorenzzoni wrote:
> Hello ALL,
>
> I took over packaging for Conquest DICOM Server a few months ago (bug
> #680352) and I am approaching upload state. You can check my work in Debian
> Git [1].
>
> Since the shortest form of the package name would be "conquest" and I'll have
> to spin off several bin packages from the source (such as conquest-sqlite,
> conquest-postgres, conquest-mysql), I think sticking to the shortest possible
> name to be important. The problem is that the archive already have a package
> named "conquest", which seems to be dead, according to the QA system [2]. But
> it's forcing me to call the package "conquest-dicom-server"... you can
> imagine the derivatives coming from that (conquest-dicom-server-postgres,
> etc)...
>
> How should I proceed?
[...]
Since it was only released in lenny and was removed from unstable over 3
years ago, I think you can consider the name to be free.
I don't know whether the QA page will reset if you upload an entirely
new source package under the same name. If not, you may wish to choose
a different *source* package name.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.
- Albert Einstein
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part