https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2263790
Martin Hoyer mhoyer@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(michel@michel-slm | |.name)
--- Comment #24 from Martin Hoyer mhoyer@redhat.com --- I've done some more reading of packaging guidelines and from what I can tell, using alternatives is the preferred way? See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Conflicts/#_incomp... https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Conflicts/#_binary...
From user perspective, there probably will never be a use-case for having the both executables installed, but on the other hand, why not. It would save us splitting the package and any potential issues with the usage of conflicts. Maybe(likely) I'm missing something. @Michel, if it's not too much to ask, could you explain why the Conflicts is considered the better option here please?