[Fedora-packaging] input on a conflicts case
a.badger at gmail.com
Mon May 9 23:44:53 UTC 2011
On Sat, May 07, 2011 at 10:11:38AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> I'm looking at the supybot-gribble package (under review).
> Currently it Conflicts: supybot.
> It's not really falling under any of the current cases on
> but I think it might be another case to add next to compat packages.
> supybot is a irc bot written in python. It's already in Fedora.
> Development is very slow. Currently many of the database functions in
> it don't work because they still haven't switched from sqlite1 for
> example. We also have several plugins that use it.
> supybot-gribble is a blessed rapid development fork. Changes here are
> fast paced and much more current. Once patches here look good and
> stable they are submitted back to the main supybot branch. It's much
> like a 'supybot-rawhide' or devel.
> The two packages share the name and python tree files. Upstream has no
> desire to rename things in supybot-gribble as this will make it harder
> to fold changes back into supybot. There is no great need to run both
> at the same time on the same machine.
> In the review I suggested we just let them conflict and setup the
> plugins so they would work with either (require /usr/bin/supybot). To
> me this seems like an acceptable Conflicts case related to the 'compat
> packages' case, except in this case it's 'newer/rawhide/ng version'.
> Thoughts? Flames?
Alternative: Let's upgrade the supybot package in Fedora to use
Thoughts on the pros and cons of that vs a conflicting package?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/attachments/20110509/8c80013a/attachment.bin
More information about the packaging