Re: removing tophat from Debian
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 02:35:21AM +0100, Steffen Möller wrote:
>
> We are packaging software, not workflows (at the very moment, mostly).
> Anybody
> requesting tophat shall get exactly that, however unfortunate that decision
> may be.
Fair enough.
> I am happy with a post-inst warning, or a debian/NEWS entry, but what the
> user gets has to be what the user asks for.
Good idea.
> >
> > 1. tophat Depends hisat2 (solves the issue that the replacement
> > will be installed
> You may suggest hisat2, or even recommend it, but you should not depend on
> it. And there is no need to enforce a replacement in the first place.
I admit I see no real harm done to use stronger relations as long as the
user really gets what was requested.
> > 2. provide instead of /usr/bin/tophat a shell script issuing
> > a warning first before the actual tophat call
What do you think about this in addition to a debian/NEWS entry?
> > What about this?
>
> This would undermine the trust that our users have in our packages.
>
> Please not. It is better remove the package from the archive than to disturb
> the integrity of the package.
I do not think that an extra dependency - for whatever motivation it was
added, will disturb the integrity of the package.
> I propose to discuss any general policy towards such desirable package
> substitutions at our upcoming Sprint in Barcelona.
+1
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: