Re: release policy changes for etch
On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 11:01:17AM -0300, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> I have a question about this requirement:
> Packages must not install programs in the default PATH with
> different functionality with the same file name, even if they
> Totem and Glade, for example, generate two binary packages each which
> are mutually exclusive.
> totem-gstreamer certainly provides functionality which is different from
> the one provided by totem-xine. The same goes for glade/glade-gnome: the
> first provides the nice UI builder, the second adds GNOME-related
> widgets and functionality.
> I and Sebastien, totem's maintainer, feel that it would not be a good
> idea to apply this requirement on these cases. Do you have a rationale
> for this requirement? Would you mind elaborating on that?
I don't think the examples of glade and totem match the meaning of
"different functionality" above since these are only slight variations
of fundamentally the same functionality (While I personally would still
prefer if e.g. glade would be a bit more flexible in its behaviour,
making the split unecessary, but that's certainly no RC bug)
Frank Lichtenheld <email@example.com>