Bug#976402: Proposed official virtual packages - todo and todo.txt

2020-12-16 Thread David Steele
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 2:34 PM David Steele wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 2:14 PM Sean Whitton > wrote: > >> >> Okay, and you expect every implementation of todo.txt to have >> tdtcleanup? I think we probably want to specify that as one of the (or >> the only?) requirements of the virt

Bug#976402: Proposed official virtual packages - todo and todo.txt

2020-12-16 Thread David Steele
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 2:14 PM Sean Whitton wrote: > > Okay, and you expect every implementation of todo.txt to have > tdtcleanup? I think we probably want to specify that as one of the (or > the only?) requirements of the virtual package. > No, no. The gtd stuff is an optional add-on to tod

Bug#976402: Proposed official virtual packages - todo and todo.txt

2020-12-16 Thread Sean Whitton
Hello, On Wed 16 Dec 2020 at 10:02AM -05, David Steele wrote: > Imagine that tdtcleanup is a pre/post hook in todo.txt-base. An > implementation of todo.txt is needed > to make use of it. Okay, and you expect every implementation of todo.txt to have tdtcleanup? I think we probably want to speci

Bug#976402: Proposed official virtual packages - todo and todo.txt

2020-12-16 Thread David Steele
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 5:29 PM David Steele wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 3:48 PM Sean Whitton > wrote: > >> >> >> Putting aside the use of the alternatives system, why is a virtual >> package wanted? When would it be useful to be able to declare a >> dependency and have it satisfied by o