On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 11:35:18AM -0400, Bill Freeman wrote: > I'd prefer stability of names to consistency of names. Many firms or > projects no longer have the engineer who set up their happily working > dependencies. #2 is the more persuasive argument, but it is only a > recommendation.
The Provides/Obsoletes fields in the spec should handle such situations. If such companies do an upgrade, they would receive the new packages in the process. We can additionally provide a transition period where we provide an empty package with the old name that depends on the new package name which provides the bits. -- Darryl L. Pierce, Sr. Software Engineer @ Red Hat, Inc. Delivering value year after year. Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors. http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
pgpFeGs9Dp13_.pgp
Description: PGP signature
