Control: reopen 1072733 = Hello all,
Chris, > > I see your point now, it seems like it should be just "Conflicts", do you > > agree? None of those 2 packages can/should be renamed. > > Please see https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html#binaries > > Conflicts is not appropriate for programs with different > functionality. That link is for binaries, whereas we are dealing with conflicting libraries, the section just below that one does not say anything about libraries with conflicting names. It sounds like you're saying this also applies to libraries and that one of them needs to be renamed or be dropped. Can you please be specific in what you think it should happen (if not that)? Zigo, > I just saw that sherlock (the social networks package) moved its python > files to /usr/share, instead of /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages > . This was > the sensible thing to do, as it doesn't really need to expose itself as > Python module. Not really, that was done by accident when Nilson was trying to remove the system-wide init file (#1071007) and was reverted already. Upstream has mentioned (to me) that their intention is to provide a library for sherlock, as we've had since the package was introduced. > Therefore, this bug can be closed, and there's IMO nothing more to do in > the python-sherlock (the cluster lock package), as the conflict is now > solved. I'll reopen 1072733 since the clash still exists. Cheers, -- Samuel Henrique <samueloph>
