Hi Dhavan, Dhavan <quark@codingquark.com> writes: > I had a conversation with Protesilaos (upstream author) to find out > why they packaged separately for elpa. Here are some of the excerpts: > Thank you for the excerpts. [snip] > Melpa has some stats which suggest that a single package would be > better: > > | Theme | Downloads | > |----------------+-----------| > | Modus Operandi | 25805 | > | Modus Vivendi | 25637 | > > I have had in the back of my mind the idea of a breaking change for > version 1.0.0 (now we are at 0.10.0), where the two packages become one > and users need to update their sources manually. But I have not thought > about the details of such a transition. I would recommend to upstream that they contact the MELPA project maintainers for migration instructions. IIRC they have something equivalent to our "Provides" mechanism that seems like it would be suitable for this change. > --- > > > > Given these, I think we are safe packaging modus-vivendi and > modus-operandi as a single package for Debian. > I agree with your analysis and conclusions :-) namely, that this is a justified digression from MELPA. I think it's the first time I've seen one too! Best, Nicholas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature