Re: RFS: figtoipe

[Alexander Bürger <acfbuerger@googlemail.com>]

Salut Vincent,

> Is your  package useful for someone  that has ipe (<<  6.0pre30-1)? As I
> understand,  those  versions  already  have  figtoipe.  Therefore,  your
> package is useless. This is why you Conflict with this package.

No, the old packages had a version of figtoipe that was unable to import
any images that were linked in the .fig files (that's why the new
version recommends netpbm), and also some bugs with reading comments and
older versions of .fig files. Therefore the new figtoipe version is also
useful with older versions of ipe.

> I  have never  seen Replaces  without  Conflicts. If  you Replaces  some
> files, then you should Conflicts  with the package that originally owned
> those files. Otherwise,  if the user removes your  package, the original
> files will not be restored.
> 
> When using Conflicts and having  files in common with the other package,
> you need Replaces  as well. Otherwise, during upgrade,  the user may see
> error messages  about your  package trying to  erase files owned  by the
> other (not yet removed) package.

So what do you think about section 7.5 in the policy manual? As I said,
to me it is confusing. It does not explicitly say that Replaces: must
come together with Conflicts:, it sounds more like there are different
meanings if it is alone (replace only some files) or with Conflicts:
(replace whole package).

Best wishes,

Alexander