Hello Chris, > > > Per Debian policy this is not the correct solution for naming conflicts. > > > Both > > > maintainer (teams), please find a policy compliant solution together. > > > > The solution for this one seems correct, it's a Conflict + Replaces because > > both packages provide a "sherlock" library. Am I missing something? > > Do both packages provide the same API? IOW: do they provide the same > "type" of library? > If so, then Conficts/Replaces may be appropriate. > > If they share a name but none of the API / features, then it is not > a correct solution.
They do not share the same API. > These descriptions do not sound related at all. In this case, > Conflicts/Replaces is not appropriate. I see your point now, it seems like it should be just "Conflicts", do you agree? None of those 2 packages can/should be renamed. Cheers, -- Samuel Henrique <samueloph>
