Bug#578854: debian-policy: Wording about Conflicts needs to be clarified

2010-04-25 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 12:04:12PM +0300, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote: > On Friday 23 April 2010 11:35:16 Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 09:27:32AM +0200, Raphaël Hertzog wrote: > > No, it definitely isn't ok. Versioned conflicts still impose significant > > constraints on calcula

Bug#578854: debian-policy: Wording about Conflicts needs to be clarified

2010-04-25 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 05:09:36PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > >> Up to now, I always used "Conflicts" for explicit file conflicts and used > >> Breaks for other subtle breakages (interface/API change). So when moving > >> files > >> from one package to the other I used "Conflicts: previo

Bug#578854: Bug# 578854: debian-policy: Wording about Conflicts needs to be clarified

2010-04-23 Thread Eugene V. Lyubimkin
> > 2/ document clearly whether versioned Breaks+Replaces or versioned > >Conflicts+Replaces ought to be used when moving files around. > Seconded, with preference to have Conflicts+Replaces for this aim. Out of conclusion of discussion in #578854, I slightly change my position for second poin

Bug#578854: debian-policy: Wording about Conflicts needs to be clarified

2010-04-23 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Steve Langasek writes: > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 09:27:32AM +0200, Raphaël Hertzog wrote: >> I stumbled upon policy 7.4: >> > A Conflicts entry should almost never have an "earlier than" version >> > clause. >> > This would prevent dpkg from upgrading or installing the package which >> > declar

Bug#578854: debian-policy: Wording about Conflicts needs to be clarified

2010-04-23 Thread Eugene V. Lyubimkin
On Friday 23 April 2010 11:35:16 Steve Langasek wrote: > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 09:27:32AM +0200, Raphaël Hertzog wrote: > No, it definitely isn't ok. Versioned conflicts still impose significant > constraints on calculating an upgrade path between releases and contribute > to upgrade failures. I

Bug#578854: debian-policy: Wording about Conflicts needs to be clarified

2010-04-23 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 09:27:32AM +0200, Raphaël Hertzog wrote: > I stumbled upon policy 7.4: > > A Conflicts entry should almost never have an "earlier than" version clause. > > This would prevent dpkg from upgrading or installing the package which > > declared > > such a conflict until the upgr

Bug#578854: debian-policy: Wording about Conflicts needs to be clarified

2010-04-23 Thread Eugene V. Lyubimkin
On Friday 23 April 2010 10:27:32 Raphaël Hertzog wrote: > 1/ fix that statement IMO Seconded. > 2/ document clearly whether versioned Breaks+Replaces or versioned >Conflicts+Replaces ought to be used when moving files around. Seconded, with preference to have Conflicts+Replaces for this aim.

Bug#578854: debian-policy: Wording about Conflicts needs to be clarified

2010-04-23 Thread Raphaël Hertzog
Package: debian-policy Version: 3.8.4.0 Severity: normal I stumbled upon policy 7.4: > A Conflicts entry should almost never have an "earlier than" version clause. > This would prevent dpkg from upgrading or installing the package which > declared > such a conflict until the upgrade or removal of