Re: django-fsm vs. django-fsm-2: Update or ITP?

To: Jakob Haufe <sur5r@debian.org>, debian-python@lists.debian.org
Cc: fladi@debian.org
Subject: Re: django-fsm vs. django-fsm-2: Update or ITP?
From: Michael Fladischer <michael@fladi.at>
Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2025 10:12:42 +0200
Message-id: <[🔎] 687ec59b-129e-408a-b985-4293167818f9@fladi.at>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20250403112529.53f2b4d7@beer>
References: <[🔎] 20250403112529.53f2b4d7@beer>

Hi Jakob,

Am 03.04.2025 um 11:25 schrieb Jakob Haufe:

2. Package django-fsm-2 as src:django-fsm-2 and add Conflicts:
    python3-django-fsm to it, so they won't be co-installed.

I would also prefer this option as I was planning to RMdjango-fsm(-admin) due to lack of upstream activity.


Regards,
Michael

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: django-fsm vs. django-fsm-2: Update or ITP?
  - From: Jakob Haufe <sur5r@debian.org>

References:
- django-fsm vs. django-fsm-2: Update or ITP?
  - From: Jakob Haufe <sur5r@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Bug#1102116: ITP: pypaperless -- Asynchronous client for interacting with Paperless-ngx API
Next by Date: Re: django-fsm vs. django-fsm-2: Update or ITP?
Previous by thread: django-fsm vs. django-fsm-2: Update or ITP?
Next by thread: Re: django-fsm vs. django-fsm-2: Update or ITP?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread