[Nut-upsdev] Re: About blazer, powermust and mustek

[Peter Selinger]

Charles Lepple wrote:
> 
> > But anyway, a symlink seems like a nice way to provide compatibility,
> > but also poses the question of how many releases to keep it around.
> 
> You're right about the development branch, though. For some reason, I
> thought this was going into testing.

But one day the development branch will become the new testing branch.
At some point users will see their driver "disappear" when they
upgrade. It might be a good idea to leave a "stub" driver with the old
name, perhaps even a shell script which prints a warning message,
informing the user that the conf file should be updated, and then
calls the correct new driver. This could be left around for a few
releases, until hopefully most users have updated their config.

I am a great fan of backwards compatibility. Especially if you batch
update a lot of packages, it is a pain to have to track down
documentation for unexplained broken behaviors.

I think we should do the same when we rename the "newhidups" driver. 

-- Peter