Alec Leamas <leamas.a...@gmail.com> writes: > On 02/07/2024 20:46, Gunnar Wolf wrote: >> Alec Leamas dijo [Tue, Jul 02, 2024 at 01:59:26AM +0200]: >>> So, at least three possible paths: >>> >>> 1. Persuade users to uninstall PPA packages before installing official >>> packages and also generation 2 PPA packages with sane versions like 5.10.x >>> >>> 2. Use versions like 9000.5.10, 9000.5.12. etc. >>> >>> 3. Use an epoch. >> >> You can also consider a third possible path: Pick a different package >> name. >> >> I am unfamiliar with opencpn to be able to suggest an alternative. But >> given opencpn has never been part of Debian, you could just name your >> package "opencpn-deb". Just to be sure users don't get surprised by >> having two different versions of the same package, it can "Conflict: >> opencpn". Then, you get a blank slate from which you can work your >> versioning as you deem adequate. >> >> It does, yes, introduce some confusion, but I think is the least evil >> option. > > opencpn is part of Debian since many years. However, the major > distribution is through an Ubuntu PPA, the official Debian package is > not that visible and of course outdated in Ubuntu. > > opencpn users are counted in at least thousands. We are trying to > convince the developer community that it's a good idea to use a package > created as an official Debian package rather than an auto-generated > cmake package distributed using the Ubuntu PPA.
If someone has gone to the effort of configuring a PPA source, it seems slightly abusive to try and override that choice by playing games with versions. If you do that, and the user has any problem as a result, then the user may be upset enough to "downgrade" to the PPA and pin it, which will burn their goodwill towards Debian, and further entrench the problem you are trying to fix. Alternatively, the PPA maintainer may just adopt the epoch:upstream version now that they are aware of the problem, and then the user gets to flap back and forth between versions from Debian and the PPA as new versions come out and are packaged at differing rates. It seems better to take an "If we build it, they will come" approach. New installs will likely get the Debian version without ever needing to discover the PPA, and the rumour will spread (assuming the Debian package works at least as well) that there's no need to bother with the PPA, and then people will do the work to remove the PPA from their configs, at a time of their choosing. Might it be worth chatting to the PPA maintainer to see it they'd like to be included in the effort to maintain the Debian package? They may discover that it's less effort for all involved doing it as a team. Cheers, Phil. -- Philip Hands -- https://hands.com/~phil
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
