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.
