RFC: Tripwire name change

[Michael Schwendt]

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 12:57:21 +0000, Keith G. Robertson-Turner wrote:

> However, the above bug only serves to emphasise the fact that specspo is
> a (essentially upstream) problem. Currently, if I were to follow that
> advice and move the reference to twinstall.sh/tripwire-setup-keyfiles out
> of the description, nobody would see the change ... instead they'd see
> line 17720 of /usr/share/doc/specspo-9.0.92/dist.pot (translated in one of
> the "mo" files), which reads:
> 
> "After installing this package, run /etc/tripwire/twinstall.sh to\n"
> 
> The *real* irony is ... there *is* no translation for Tripwire anyway ...
> it's all in English in the "mo" files, so why is it in there at all?
> 
> I'm loath to change the name, but I don't feel comfortable squeezing out
> other people's packages either, however in this case I might have to make
> an exception. I'm with Warren for making specspo a "Conflicts".

It does not conflict [*]. The tripwire package can co-exist with specspo
just fine. It is a really minor annoyance that querying the package
description returns something wrong if specspo is installed. Unless you
receive bug reports about that frequently, don't change it. Don't expect
package users to look for documentation in %description. And if they do,
then that's the problem.

[*] "Conflicts:" is for much more serious issues such as file based
conflicts, run-time conflicts (e.g. alternative implementations of the
same library or application), known or expected incompatibilities (e.g.
"Requires: foo >= 1.0, Conflicts: foo >= 2.0").

--