On Sun, May 01, 2005 at 12:38:41AM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 06:45:26PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > > But you remove the package from testing doesn't mean we won't have > > users with it installed since it was present there so, IMHO, the > > Conflict is need. > > The bug is in the other package, packages are not required to work > around other bugs in other packages, that'd be a gigantic mess of > workarounds.
There'll be lots of workarounds, but that doesn't necessarily equate to 'a mess'. > If dash breaks using my package for whatever reason, I'm not going to > add a conflict: dash (with non-fixed version or whatever), dash needs > to fix it. True. However, it does no harm to add the conflicts, while it does make it easier for your users. When presented with a bug in another package that completely breaks mine (rather than the entire system), usually I do add the conflicts: header. > Ditto here, and the fix is removing the package. ... which would be accomplished by adding the Conflicts: header. I don't see the problem. That being said, of course the choice is up to the maintainer; I'm not going to tell you (or him) what to do :-) -- The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the pavement is precisely one bananosecond -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
