Hi Barak, Jeremy, Jeremy Sowden <aza...@debian.org> writes:
> On 2024-11-05, at 20:40:08 +0000, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote: >> To my mind, the natural solution is to put git-commit.el in elpa-magit >> (as upstream wants) but keep the elpa-git-commit package around, >> empty, and with a Depends: elpa-magit (>= xxx) or even Depends: >> elpa-magit (== xxx) to ensure that git-commit.el is pulled in. And >> elpa-magit has a Breaks: elpa-git-commit (<< xxx). And maybe even a >> Provides: elpa-git-commit. I think this is the "approved" way to >> handle this sort of transition. And it maintains various invariants, >> like other packages can have dependencies on either, and it's possible >> to reverse the transition painlessly in the future if necessary. >> >> I think. > > That would be my approach, fwiw. > > J. I think what you suggested is mostly aligned with case #6 in [1] - it uses `Breaks' and `Replaces', while `Provides' is optional and useful when there are other packages depending on it (currently only elpa-magit depends on elpa-git-commit.) FYI I have implemented these in [2] and [3] (hopefully correctly.) [1] https://wiki.debian.org/PackageTransition [2] https://salsa.debian.org/emacsen-team/magit/-/commit/2bfb89369fdc09b243b6cdd75ffbc4528d7b2521 [3] https://salsa.debian.org/emacsen-team/magit/-/commit/b90235ed21ab967f6e72e64d2767abc1cf5d88cf -- Regards, Xiyue Deng
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
