Re: Conflicting alternatives
> But if you're seriously figuring out how to have, say, coexisting MTAs,
> and fold that back into the Debian project, then I would have thought
> that tweaking the Control fields is part of the deliverable.
My use-case is when the users (e.g. yours truly) have no intention of
folding it back into the Debian project because they are well-aware that
their needs are too marginal.
> In terms of this thread, I would say that emacs is user-y® (and
> appears in /etc/alternatives a lot).
Yes, but the maintainers of the `emacs` Debian package decided some
years ago that they didn't want to keep bothering with trying to support
several packages like emacs23, emacs24, and emacs25 at the same time and
just brought it all down to a single `emacs` (well, plus the `-nox` and
`-lucid` variants, which is part of the reason for the alternatives).
I fully agree with them that it's the best choice for them and for
Debian. It's just not the best choice for me.
Stefan "who sometimes feels like what he really wants is to get
a merge of Debian, Nix, and Guix"
Reply to: