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

[Dan S]

2011/5/15 Felipe Sateler <fsateler at debian.org>:
> 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.

OK, done.

Best
Dan