Christian Aichinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Since that violates policy, the removal of /usr/bin/git
As explained, I do not see why this violates policy, as the git shell script offers the git-core functionality. What other way is there for a neat transition for stable users? > is documented in git's NEWS.Debian and git's popcon count Popularity doesn't make it right for a new package to use binary names from an existing one. git-core is new next release, so it should give way for now. I think the git maintainer has already been far more flexible than he needed to be. > is somewhere at 190, I think the easiest solution is to just kill > the alternatives and let git-core have the file. That solution was previously rejected by maintainers. > If somebody does an NMU please remember to adjust the version in > debian/NEWS. Please do not NMU this previously-rejected approach without further discussion. If the consensus is that using alternatives for this transition is a policy violation, I will encourage git's maintainer to stop renaming the upstream's git to gitfm in the diff.gz for now. If there is an alternative neat transition possible, what is it? Thanks, -- MJR/slef Laux nur mia opinio: vidu http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Bv sekvu http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
