[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: Request for review: koffice
- From: Andreas Bierfert <andreas bierfert lowlatency de>
- To: Discussion related to Fedora Extras <fedora-extras-list redhat com>
- Subject: Re: Request for review: koffice
- Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 08:40:46 +0200
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jeff Pitman wrote:
> That's what I was thinking. This is what I'm doing for Python-Twisted
> 2.x, who've split their packages and use different Versions for each
> sub-package. Doing so creates an upgrade path from the previous
> monolithic package.
Just one question with this: Having a koffice-suite package which obsoletes
koffice (and -i18n) and Requires all the subpackages from the new version should
do the trick on update. The question is what is needed in koffice-core? Also
Obsolete the old version or Conflict the old version? What is the best way to go?
- - Andreas
- --
Andreas Bierfert | http://awbsworld.de | GPG: C58CF1CB
andreas bierfert lowlatency de | http://lowlatency.de | signed/encrypted
phone: +49 2402 102373 | cell: +49 172 9789968 | mail preferred
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFC4JTuQEQyPsWM8csRAj+aAJ9TiWAZFWqG9j0LzIEsNYiwkUkqLQCdHByl
J2U+9Yl7ap33Wn2JJsexiMo=
=nIwA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]