On 04/09/11 at 00:54 +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: > On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 22:32:19 +0200 Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > [...] > > Hi, > > Hi Lucas, thanks a lot for your kind reply! > > > > > Do you know why those versioned deps were introduced? > > Well, actually, after digging into the git repository, I remembered that > the versioned dependency was introduced by me for a previous > transition... :-/ > http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=apt-listbugs/apt-listbugs.git;a=commitdiff;h=8da1d43065b8427abe52e4c93f9ee9dfe369f0ff > > In other words, in that occasion, I didn't think about people who could > wish to backport apt-listbugs. So maybe, I could do the same now and > update the version. > On the other hand, keeping the old version as a useful indication for > potential backporters looks like a good idea. > > > > > In any case, using versioned deps is probably the safe solution here. > > Good, if what I discovered doesn't change the conclusion, I'll keep the > versioned dependency.
Please do. If you want to facilitate backports, maybe use something like: ruby-cmdparse2 (>= X) | libcmdparse2-ruby (>= X) Lucas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
