Bug#602050: ITP: supercollider -- A real time audio synthesis programming language

Felipe Sateler fsateler at debian.org
Sun May 15 16:33:25 UTC 2011

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 06:07, Dan S <danstowell+debmm at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2011/5/11 Felipe Sateler <fsateler at debian.org>:
>> Hi, sorry for taking so long.
>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 15:57, Dan S <danstowell+debmm at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2011/4/16 Felipe Sateler <fsateler at debian.org>:
>>>> - I would really like to fold all the -dev packages into one. I don't
>>>> see much point in splitting them.
>>> I've discussed it with the upstream devs and we're OK with merging
>>> them, so I've done that.
>> Good. However, the relationship with thte old packages is wrong. It
>> should Replace the older packages.
> Ah right, thanks.
>> However, I'm not quite sure if we
>> should apply policy 7.6.1 or 7.6.2 (ie, Replaces+Breaks or
>> Replaces+Conflicts+Provides).
>> What do others think?
> In lieu of any other responses (so far), the latter
> (Replaces+Conflicts+Provides) seems to me to have the better
> semantics, although we're not talking about virtual packages (which
> policy 7.5 is pretty specific about). From reading the guide I can't
> decide either; unless anyone can advise, maybe we should go for
> Replaces+Breaks.

Upon further reading, I think we should use
conflicts+replaces+provides, because we are replacing whole packages.


Felipe Sateler

More information about the pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list