Bug#799268: RFS: ck/1.6.2 [ITP]

[Gianfranco Costamagna <costamagnagianfranco@yahoo.it>]

>

>> Oh, I didn't know that :( . Will it really be a problem (I didn't see any
>> tool called ck yet)? The problem is that our users now share some artifacts
>> in this format and they use this name (in scripts or internal calls),
>> so changing this name now will be a nightmare :( ...
>
>I'm not sure if there's an official policy about that. It's probably
>worth trying to upload with a ck binary, and see if someone complains :)



I guess you can always install a longer name and create a symlink to ck.
(and bother upstream about it)


this way people can move to the new binary, and if somebody complain you can
"safely" drop the symlink.

(or use some "update-alternative" tools I don't remember how)


Just my .02$

G.