The Wanderer <wande...@fastmail.fm> writes: > As to why it's listed as being a conflict, my understanding is that the > upstream e16 used to be called enlightenment - that upstream, in fact, > considers them to be in some sense different versions of the same > package. (This is part of why it seems to me that there *should* - in > the sense which is similar to "must" - be a migration path. That's a > separate argument, however.) I seem to recall that the maintainer said > that he had been being pressed by the e16 people to have Debian go along > with that name change, but I don't think I know any of the details.
This isn't really a good reason for a conflict when there's no upgrade path from the old package to the new package, for precisely the reason that you ran into. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
