Bug#976402: Proposed official virtual packages - todo and todo.txt

[Bill Allombert <ballombe@debian.org>]

On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 05:12:13PM -0500, David Steele wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 4:42 PM Bill Allombert <ballombe@debian.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 01:34:44PM -0500, David Steele wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 1:15 PM Bill Allombert <ballombe@debian.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Do you envision to have packages depending on todo and then use the
> > > > todo binary ?
> > > >
> > >
> > > No. This is a means to allow topydo and todotxt-cli to use "todo" without
> > > crowding devtodo. I believe this meets the definition of a virtual
> > package
> > > in the Policy.
> >
> > I am not use I understand. Do you plan for /usr/bin/todo to be managed by
> > update-alternatives ? That would require all alternatives to share a common
> > interface.
> >
> 
> The guidance in the Policy is that alternatives "offer more-or-less the same
> functionality". I believe this standard is met.

Are people using /usr/bin/todo in script or Makefile ?
Are they likely to still work with the alternatives ?

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>

Imagine a large red swirl here.