On Dec/15, Maximilian Hils wrote: > (2) mitmproxy may still be installable, but it potentially just > breaks due to backwards-incompatible changes within the dependency. > If I understand things correctly, there's no automated testing that > would alert someone in either case, so (2) may be preferential for > Debian as that it would simply break less often (although possibly in > more subtle ways). I don't know how Debian handles this generally and > what the best practices are for this.
All right, I'll remove the versioned dependencies in my package, and users can open bugs when/if a new dependency breaks mitmproxy because of backwards-incompatible changes. Thanks for the all input, cheers, --Seb
