On 09/16/2016 01:20 AM, Santiago Vila wrote: > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 06:04:54PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > >> I think it would be simpler and more correct for python-cryptography to >> declare a breaks relationship with python-openssl, e.g. (in the binary >> control >> stanza for python-cryptography): >> >> Breaks: python-openssl (<< FIRST_NOT_BROKEN_VERSION~) >> >> That should ensure python-openssl is upgraded with python-cryptography >> without >> having to touch an entire stack of rdepends. > > Hello. > > I was the one who asked for these build-depends to become versioned. > > My rationale for that is in policy when it says that "it must be > possible to build the package when the build-dependencies are met".
Which would be handled by what proposed Scott, which is done already (see below). > Your proposed solution, Scott, seems indeed a lot better than updating > the build-depends of a bunch of packages, and it makes the policy > requirement to be met in a different way, namely, by not allowing > the affected packages to be built with build-dependencies which are > known to be incompatible. I don't agree, I think Scott's proposal is sound. > Thomas: Would you take care of filing whatever bug is necessary for > this solution to be implemented? That's IMO not needed, as python-cryptography 1.5-2 already has: Breaks: python-openssl (<< 16.0.0) Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
