On 11-04-2024 13:54, Miro HronĨok wrote:
On 11. 04. 24 11:55, Sandro wrote:
> While I ponder those thoughts some more, moving forward in either
> direction, the next step would be writing a change proposal?
I'd start by:
Packaging pynose without hacks (only making it Conflict with nose, no
compatibility Provides, Obsoletes or dist-infos).
That way, pro-active packagers can switch already.
That makes sense. Review is up [1]. If enough packagers adapt, I may not
need to go through the changes process.
And the change proposal can then describe what will be *added* to
pynose, rather than describing the approach from scratch.
Since predicting the future is difficult, I'll start on writing up a
proposal while the package is being introduced, anyway.
[1]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2274514
-- Sandro