Re: signify and signify-openbsd names

[Marvin Renich <mrvn@renich.org>]

* Simon Richter <sjr@debian.org> [241007 04:32]:
> The correct approach is one release with a transitional package, pulling the
> new package in, and one release with the name unused (so the transitional
> package is listed in Obsolete/Local).
> 
> The release without the package also makes sure that any archive version
> constraints (oldstable < stable, stable < testing, testing < unstable) are
> satisfied even if testing < oldstable.

Let me see if I understand what you are saying.

trixie:
  remove old src: signify

  single source upload:
    src:     signify -> signify-mail
    binary:  signify -> signify-mail
             new signify as transitional
               unversioned Depends: signify-mail

trixie+1:
  remove transitional binary signify

trixie+2:
  rename binary signify-openbsd -> signify
    Is the following necessary?
      versioned Conflicts: signify <= version of transitional signify in trixie
      version of this signify must be > version of old transitional pkg

I believe that renaming the source from signify-openbsd to signify has
very little benefit.  What most users are going to see is the binary
package.  Anyone searching for the source package generally has enough
knowledge of Debian to find the correct source.  Leaving the source name
clearly distinguishes it from the old source.

...Marvin