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

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
> 	Conflict:.
> 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 <djpig@debian.org>
www: http://www.djpig.de/

Reply to: