Hi Praveen, On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 05:30:27PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote: > fuubar gem depends on ruby-progressbar gem and we already have > ruby-progressbar package because of progressbar gem. > I don't see any reverse dependencies for ruby-progressbar. and the lat > update for progressbar gem is september 2013 whereas ruby-progressbar > has recent releases. > I'm thinking about replacing current ruby-progressbar package with > ruby-progressbar package. Let me know if there is any objections. This question has been asked a long time ago (Jan 2013) by Hideki Yamane http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers/2013-January/013531.html It is tempting to agree with you, but: - the current ruby-progressbar package has a popcon ~ 80, which is better than the median for the packages maintained by the team - the ruby-progressbar gem uses a different name for the filenames than the progressbar gem. - Since it has no reverse-deps/reverse build-deps, it has been installed because people use it for local scripts, and there is no way with Breaks: fields to tell them that their scripts will stop working if we replace one by the other. So I would go for a new package. If you replace it, then it should be considered as if you removed the old one from the archive, and put a new package with the same name. You would need to put a big fat warning in a NEWS.Debian file to mention that it has nothing to do with the old name, so that people are warned on upgrade. What do others think? Cheers, Cédric > Thanks > Praveen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature