Hello everyone,
I maintain the /helium-browser-bin/ packaging, and I'm considering a
rename to /helium-bin/, which I've also put forward to the community in
the comments. This consideration comes as upstream Linux packaging
matures [1].
When I submitted the package initially, my thinking was to append
/-browser/ to avoid potential naming conflicts, but it now seems
unnecessary and isn't consistent with upstream. I was hoping to get some
guidance on whether a rename is reasonable in this case, and if so, how
to best go about it while minimising problems for end users.
My current plan is:
1. Submit the /helium-bin/ package to the AUR as normal
2. Add `conflicts=('helium-browser-bin')' to /helium-bin/ PKGBUILD to
allow users to cleanly remove the old version on install
3. Push existing package to the new repo to preserve git history
4. Initiate a merge request for /helium-browser-bin/ to /helium-bin/ to
preserve comments and remove the old package
I would do this after the next release at the time while keeping users
up to date. I've tested packaging locally with success, and impacts to
users should be constrained to the package name and install paths
removing the 'browser' suffix. The entry point remains
`/usr/bin/helium-browser'.
Questions ::
- Is this the correct/preferred method?
- While in between merge requests, which repo should I treat as the
source of truth in the case of updates?
- Anything that I've missed?
Thanks very much in advance!
Cheers,
Sam
[1]: https://github.com/imputnet/helium-linux/pull/149
