On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 12:15:06PM -0500, David Steele wrote: > Package: debian-policy > Severity: wishlist > X-Debbugs-Cc: [email protected], [email protected], > [email protected] > thanks > > > I'd like to propose adding the virtual packages "todo" and "todo.txt" to > the authoritative list of virtual package names. I'm submitting this per > Policy section 3.6 and the preamble to the [authoritative list]. > > [Todo.txt] describes an ecosystem of task management tools that revolve > around a standard for a freeform-text tasking file. > > The reference cli has been packaged for some time, as "todotxt-cli". It > provides the executable "todo-txt". > > An alternative cli provider, "topydo", has been recently added, adding > an executable by the same name. > > I propose uniting this packages using the name "todo" - the common name > for the utility. Since not all todo list packages that may want to share > that name conform to the todo.txt standards, I also propose "todo.txt", > a strict subset of "todo", for packages which conform. > > Note that topydo already implements these virtual packages, and that > there now exists a todo.txt-base packages that extends cli todo.txt > capabilities. There is also a todo.txt-cli package in Sid. This is > redundant, and has a pending RM request. > > I did a screen scrape of p.d.o to find any possible collisions for these > names. There is a single package, devtodo (popcon 74, recently ITA'd), > that installs a "todo" executable. Currently, topydo Conflicts with this > package. I'd propose adding it to the "todo" virtual package. > > This is a request for comment per the procedure in the list.
Does all theses tools provide an compatible interface ? In other word, are there interoperable ? Cheers, -- Bill. <[email protected]> Imagine a large red swirl here.
