On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 20:49:39 Julien Cristau wrote: > There *has* to be a preference (preferrably a common one across the > archive). Otherwise the package manager gets to choose a random > provider, which is the worst possible outcome.
I do not understand why there has to be a preference. I understand behaviour of package manager and I've deliberately chosen not to have a preference. I do not see any benefits of having prefered client package in this case. Why do you insist that virtual-only dependency is wrong? It is hardly a "worst possible outcome" when all alternatives are equally suitable. > > I've realised that "virtual-mysql-client" can be demoted to Recommends -- > > please advise if that change warrants an unblock in which case I will > > upload to "unstable". Thank you. > > Not if it stays virtual-only. Would you be satisfied if I add an alternative as follows? virtual-mysql-client | mysql-client Thanks. -- All the best, Dmitry Smirnov.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.