At 12:10 PM 8/23/2010 +0200, Alexis Métaireau wrote:
Le 08/23/2010 05:56 AM, Tarek Ziadé a écrit :
> If that's the case, then it should suffice to explain in the PEP that the
>> intent of this field is for an author/owner to describe reorganization of
>> their own software, rather than for one package to claim that it's a
>> replacement for another.
> We can improve the Obsoletes-Dist description, sure. Notice that
> it will be misused if we don't add Conflict-Dist. That's basically
> why I wanted to add this field, as suggested by someone on IRC (sorry
> I forgot who)
True: we need to make the descriptions clearer, especially fot the
installation script creation POV.
I have updated the description of those two fields (that are
obsoletes-Release and Conflict-Release *not* dist), you can see the
changes I propose here:
http://bitbucket.org/ametaireau/python-peps/changeset/22f08df917f2
Looks pretty good. It'd be nice if it was clearer that installation
tools should not use the Obsoletes or Conflicts fields to uninstall
things without user or author verification (or to silently block
dependency fulfillment) but it's definitely improved.
_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
Catalog-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
