On Fri, 30 Mar 2012, Colin Guthrie wrote: > 'Twas brillig, and Guillaume Rousse at 30/03/12 10:17 did gyre and gimble: > > Using task-obsolete is fine: > > - its purpose is crystal-clear > > - if I don't want it, I don't install it > > > > Adding an obsolete tag in openjdk to remove sun jdk now, for security > > concernes, whereas we had suffered a useless mess of at least four > > available java environnement at once for years uselessly (excepted for > > blindly applying jpackage project practices), doesn't seems quite similar. > > Well think of it this way (assuming I have the facts vaguely straight): > > Forget about Cauldron and mga2 > > We're providing a known insecure version to mga1 users. > > We need to find a way to update mga1 somehow right? Or do we want to > just abandon them? > > Assuming we do not want to abandon them, what do we do? I'd suggest > shipping a new empty package that replaces it with a README.urpmi > telling them to go to Sun directly is the most responsible thing for us > to do. If they do not have a JRE installed, and they have packages that > require one, then they should be prompted to install e.g. openjdk to > satisfy package deps. That should work OK right?
I think an empty package is not a good idea, it would be better to obsolete it in task-obsolete : - it's more clear that the package is obsoleted and is not a regular update. Users installing an empty package as update would only see that it is removed but not updated when it's already removed. - package is really removed and no longer listed as installed in rpm database - it's easy to add task-obsolete in urpmi skip.list for people who don't want unmaintained packages to be automatically removed
