On Sun, Apr 10, 2022 at 07:37:05PM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote: > Hi Dom and gregor, > > On Sun, Apr 10, 2022 at 03:06:56PM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote: > > +1 to all of this. > > Thank you for your replies. They're not unexpected, but we (or at least > I) weren't entirely sure. > > > Furthermore I'm troubled that this discussion rolled on for two months > > having dropped the perl folk, in a circular fashion. That doesn't seem > > to be in the spirit of cooperation alluded to in > > > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1003653#122 > > At that time, we (ctte) didn't really consider changing the > /usr/bin/rename API to be a viable option, but apparently Chris did and > that only became fully clear much later. Thus the question popped up > now. > > In any case, we now have three relevant opinions that form a > contradiction when combined: > > * Submitter: The util-linux rename implementation should be included in > Debian > * Chris: The util-linux rename should be either /usr/bin/rename or > absent. > * Dom/gregor: /usr/bin/rename should be perl rename. > > In all of this discussion, I think we didn't have such a clear > understanding of the disagreement. It always looked solvable in a > consensual way to me. That has somewhat changed now. > > The next step is checking back with Chris on whether his position could > be adjusted. I would still prefer resolving this without using special > ctte powers.
Thanks for the clarification. By the way, it's possible that this discussion has taken place without reference to the original bug where these issues were discussed at length: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=735134 I should have provided this link back in February when we were first asked about it; mea culpa. I hope this is helpful. Dominic