[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: foo vs. foo+



Am Samstag, den 21.07.2007, 22:24 +0200 schrieb Nils Philippsen:
> On Sat, 2007-07-21 at 16:07 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> > Am Samstag, den 21.07.2007, 09:47 +0200 schrieb Till Maas:
> > > On Saturday 21 July 2007 04:15:19 Christoph Wickert wrote:
> > > > Imagine there are two projects: foo and foo+. foo+ is a fork, a
> > > > different flavor of foo, but both offer the same functionality and are
> > > > compatible for other apps that sit on top of foo(+).
> > > >
> > > > Now both projects want to be included in fedora. First of all, both
> > > > packages need a Conflicts: foo conflicts foo+ and foo+ conflicts foo.
> > > 
> > > Why do they need to conflict each other?
> > 
> > Because their files are conflicting. They are installing to the same
> > directories.
> 
> They should use alternatives.

This would require major changes to the codebase, because nearly
_everything_ (libs, man pages etc) is conflicting. Also I'm not sure if
any of the developers is willing to mke the required changes as foo+ is
kind of foo's upstream.

This is not a theoretical example, this is real live: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188542
especially comments #32,33, 35 and 38
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188542#c32

Chris


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]