Re: upstream changed the source tarball name...
On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 12:01 +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 04:53:50PM -0700, Al Stone wrote:
>
> If it were my package, I'd make the judgement call to still call the source
> package acovea, name the source tarball acovea_5.1.1.orig.tar.gz, and build
> the extra binary packages.
Fair enough. I'd considered that option, too.
> > -- And the 'acovea' binary package now being created should Conflict/
> > Replace with older versions, correct? This also seems to make
> > sense.
>
> I can't think of any reason why you'd need to C/R acovea against itself --
> you can't have two versions of the same package installed in any case.
> You'd probably need to C/R libacovea 5.1.1 against acovea 4.0.0, if the old
> acovea binary package included the shared library (or other files which
> libacovea now provides).
There would be no conflicting binary files; I just reckoned the source
file changes might confuse things.
> > -- But, how do I properly inform the ftp masters that the old
> > 'acovea' source has been replaced by the new 'libacovea' source,
> > even though both produce a binary package called 'acovea' (and
> > should do so)? ITP the new stuff and file the bug to remove the
> > old?
>
> Upload. They're clever people, they'll sort it out. If in doubt, make the
> changelog nice and verbose.
>
> - Matt
Indeed :). Generally the wisest approach.
Thanks.
--
Ciao,
al
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Al Stone Alter Ego:
Open Source and Linux R&D Debian Developer
Hewlett-Packard Company http://www.debian.org
E-mail: ahs3@fc.hp.com ahs3@debian.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: