Hi James! On 2016-10-19 22:56 +0100, James Cowgill wrote: > Recently on IRC, uau suggested that instead of transitioning mplayer2 > users to mplayer, they should be transitioned to mpv instead. The > reasons for this include: mpv being a fork of mplayer2 (thus retaining > mplayer2 specific functionality), and mpv being much more actively > developed than mplayer. > > I happen to think this is a good idea. Does anyone have any opinions > about it?
Probably a good idea with mpv being more similar to mplayer2. > The plan would be: > > Add an mplayer2 transitional package to mpv with an epoched version > (probably 3:<mpv version>) and containing a symlink from mplayer to mpv. > The package would need to conflict/replaces/provides mplayer, like > mplayer2 did before it was removed. Then remove the old transitional > package from mplayer and revert the old conflicts/replaces the package > had. Once stretch is released, the mplayer2 package can be dropped. Will this work out correctly if I later install mplayer on a system that transitioned from mplayer2 to mpv? Because of the symlinks and such... I guess yes, but I assume you can give an answer easily. Alexander _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers