> On Tue, 18 Jan 2005, Anthony Towns wrote: > > > Santiago Vila wrote: > > > The point is not about "needing" dummy packages or not. > > > > Well, yes it is -- they're not there for their own sake, they're there > > to ensure upgrades happen smoothly and automatically. If they're not > > *necessary* for that, they're not useful -- any other way of achieving > > it is better. > > Will be better when the other way exists, but this is not the case now. > So, until then, dummy packages are currently necessary.
Well, just to clarify: I am talking here about the need of dummy packages once you have decided to rename a package. Saying that the dummy packages are not needed because the renaming is just delayed to the next stable release would not count. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
