* Sylvestre Ledru <sylves...@debian.org> [230924 15:57]: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: Sylvestre Ledru <sylves...@debian.org> > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-de...@lists.debian.org > > * Package name : eza > * URL : https://github.com/eza-community/eza > * License : MIT > > it is a replacement of exa (dead upstream). > it will break/replace it.
Why? If they are not co-installable, this is the correct dependency. Also, if you are the maintainer of the old package, and you are planning to remove the old package after the next release, and are doing this to automatically upgrade users from the old package to the new package, then this, as well as the rest of the advice at https://wiki.debian.org/RenamingPackages, is appropriate. However, just because eza is the _logical_ replacement for a dead-upstream package is not a reason for it to have a Debian package dependency forcing the removal of the old package when installing the new. If they are co-installable, and the removal of the old package is not imminent, I would simply coordinate with the maintainer of the old package (if he/she is amenable), and when yours is uploaded, add a sentence to the bottom of the old package description stating that the package is obsolete and naming your package as the preferred, actively maintained replacement. Also add a NEWS entry with that info in the old package. ...Marvin
