Hi all, Chris mentioned this bug in reply to me on #1104051 so I'm putting my 2p in here.
On Sat, Mar 15, 2025 at 10:05:11PM +0100, Milan Zamazal wrote: > >>>>> "VV" == Valentin Vidic <vvi...@debian.org> writes: > > VV> Maybe the binary can be renamed to crm114 and NEWS.Debian can > VV> list dpkg-divert as an option if someone needs to keep it under > VV> the original name? > > This is the cleanest option. I thought about the fact that all the > crm114 users would be impacted while in case nobody uses both crm114 and > crmsh on the same machine (which is quite likely I guess), making the > packages simply conflicting wouldn’t impact anybody. But it’s probably > better to go with the cleaner option, it’s a one-time change after all. We need to consider what is the best course of action for Trixie, and then longer-term. Trixie hard freeze is 2025-05-15 (13 days time). I agree that the best longer-term solution is to rename crm114 (slightly grumpy, since it's been established at bin/crm for far longer). However, I think implementing a rename at this point and having effectively zero time for a transition to soak before the freeze is not great for users. How about adding a conflict and a NEWS.Debian entry for Trixie, explaining the conflict and that for trixie+1 it'll be renamed (and no conflict)?
