[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Moose v2.0000 upgrade

On Sun, 17 Apr 2011 14:35:31 +0200, Alessandro Ghedini wrote:

> > > > 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.
> We'll at least avoid dependency breakage. Since libmoose-perl is going to
> Conflicts: libclass-mop-perl (they install the same files) 

More like Breaks+Replaces, ...

> if e.g. 
> libfoo-perl depends on both libmoose-perl and libclass-mop-perl, when moose
> will be upgraded (and consequently, libclass-mop-perl removed) libfoo-perl
> will remain with unsatisfied dependencies... the same applies if e.g.
> libfoo-perl depends on libmoose-perl and libbar-perl depends on
> libclass-mop-perl. On the contrary if libmoose-perl Provides: 
> libclass-mop-perl AFAIK there shouldn't be such problems.

Yes, but only if the dependency on libclass-mop-perl is unversioned.

I see the following options:
* Ship Class::MOP in libmoose-perl, drop libclass-mop-perl, add a
  plus: file bugs against packages (build) dependening on
  libclass-mop-perl in advance, fix those within the group to use
  libmoose-perl (>= 2) | libclass-mop-perl
  raise the bug severity of the others to serious, do NMUs if
  (That was the way we did for libwww-perl. The "cleanest" solution
  but might require more work.)
* Breaks+Replaces, plus add the Provides if there are no versioned
  (build) dependencies.
* Continue shipping the libclass-mop-perl binary package, built from
  the libmoose-perl source package. (Probably no good idea.)
* Breaks+Replaces, add a libclass-mop-perl transitional dummy package
  depending on libmoose-perl to libmoose-perl to ease the transition.
  (Errs on the safe side at the cost of the dummy package.)

I guess it depends on how many packages are affected and how many of
them are maintained within the group.  

gregor, who hopes others can also spare a few brain cycles to avoid
        too much headaches :)
 .''`.   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: DKP: Dem Morgenrot entgegen

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: