On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 09:04, Dan S <danstowell+de...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2011/5/15 Felipe Sateler <fsate...@debian.org>: >> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 06:07, Dan S <danstowell+de...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> 2011/5/11 Felipe Sateler <fsate...@debian.org>: >>>> Hi, sorry for taking so long. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 15:57, Dan S <danstowell+de...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> 2011/4/16 Felipe Sateler <fsate...@debian.org>: >>>>> >>>>>> - I would really like to fold all the -dev packages into one. I don't >>>>>> see much point in splitting them. >>>>> >>>>> I've discussed it with the upstream devs and we're OK with merging >>>>> them, so I've done that. >>>> >>>> Good. However, the relationship with thte old packages is wrong. It >>>> should Replace the older packages. >>> >>> Ah right, thanks. >>> >>>> However, I'm not quite sure if we >>>> should apply policy 7.6.1 or 7.6.2 (ie, Replaces+Breaks or >>>> Replaces+Conflicts+Provides). >>>> >>>> What do others think? >>> >>> In lieu of any other responses (so far), the latter >>> (Replaces+Conflicts+Provides) seems to me to have the better >>> semantics, although we're not talking about virtual packages (which >>> policy 7.5 is pretty specific about). From reading the guide I can't >>> decide either; unless anyone can advise, maybe we should go for >>> Replaces+Breaks. >> >> Upon further reading, I think we should use >> conflicts+replaces+provides, because we are replacing whole packages. > > OK, done.
I probably won't be able to dedicate much time to this during this week, so if anyone else can have a look at this package and comment on it, I'd appreciate it. I'd like to have more eyeballs looking at it since it is not a trivial package and I could have missed some things. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
