On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 15:41:34 -0400, Jonathan Yu wrote: > >> I fully agree with this course of action, as long as you're careful > >> that reverse dependencies of libmodern-perl are identified and fixed. > >> Otherwise, we can also provide a temporary dummy package, but I think > >> getting the reverse dependencies fixed should be our priority. > > There are no reverse deps. Good, so we don't need a Provides. > > I'm guessing Replaces: libmodern-perl > > should be sufficient for unstable/testing folks that have > > libmodern-perl installed? No, that won't provide an upgrade path for current users of libmodern-perl. > I believe it both Replaces libmodern-perl (that means files in > libmodern-perl-perl overwrite ones in libmodern-perl) and It needs the versioned Replaces for this reason, right. And a versioned Conflicts probably too. > Provides > libmodern-perl (ie, a virtual package). I currently don't see the need for a virtual package. > Depending on what is needed, > transitional empty binary packages may be needed as well. But if there > are no reverse deps we don't need to bother with any of that, simply > removing libmodern-perl should be good.. That will make current users of libmodern-perl unhappy. A transitional dummy package depending on libmodern-perl-perl will pull in the new package. (And then we don't need a removal request, the old source package is just garbage-collected.) This also needs a higher version number (libmodern-perl has 1.03-2, libmodern-perl-perl has 1.03-1). Cheers, gregor, who hopes that he got everything right :) -- .''`. http://info.comodo.priv.at/ -- GPG key IDs: 0x8649AA06, 0x00F3CFE4 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, & developer - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Ludwig Hirsch: Komm, großer schwarzer Vogel
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature