On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:33:16 +0200, Dominique Dumont wrote: (just a short note, I'm mostly offline this week) > On Tuesday 12 April 2011 23:21:12 Alessandro Ghedini wrote: > > What should we do? IMHO these packages should be updated to depend on > > libmoose-perl (fortunately some of them already do) and Or "libmoose-perl (>= 2) | libclass-mop-perl)"; cf. the recent libwww-perl changes. > > libclass-mop-perl > > removed from the archive, meanwhile I thought I could add a Provides: > > libclass-mop-perl in libmoose-perl, is this correct? > I think so. Since Class::Mop might be useful outside of Moose, I think > "Provides: libclass-mop-perl" should be kept indefinitely. Please note that there are no versioned Provides, so maybe providing libclass-mop-perl is not so helpful. I hope that jawnsy's knowledge about the Moose world and periapt's experiences with the libwww-perl transition can help here :) Cheers, gregor -- .''`. 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 `- BOFH excuse #116: the real ttys became pseudo ttys and vice-versa.
Description: Digital signature