[Pkg-xfce-devel] xfce4 in ubuntu
ema at debian.org
Mon Aug 8 15:57:15 UTC 2005
* Jani Monoses <jani.monoses at gmail.com>, [2005-08-08 16:45 +0300]:
> One of the problems we bumped into is that our current xffm4 package
> uses an epoch - 1:4.2.1 making it 'newer' that 4.2.2 in sid which
> we cannot smoothly upgrade and sync.
> Would it be ok with you to add an epoch to xffm4 in debian too so we
> don't have to keep gratuitous deltas? I don't know why the epoch was
> needed back then.
Do the changelog explain why the epoch was introduced? I am a bit
reluctant about using them if not *strictly* necessary...
But let's hear what other people think, especially Simon, who did the
biggest amount of work on the core of the desktop environment.
> Another os-works /sid difference is the package name of Benny's
> terminal.He used xterminal while sid has xfce4-terminal.
> To make upgrading easier it was suggested to me that a new xterminal
> transitional package is created and made dependent on xfce4-terminal,
> while the latter is set to Replace and Conflict with an xterminal
> package earlier than the transitional version.
> Again would you take such a change in debian - I suppose it helps
> those currently using debian who have used os-works packages in the
The reason why we adopted the 'xfce4-terminal' name (after a long
discussion) is that we are trying to avoid general names for
applications which are Xfce oriented. A transitional package called
xterminal would break all our efforts in that direction.
> I'll keep you posted with our changes to see if they're relevant to
Thank you very much, your help is very appreciated.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-xfce-devel/attachments/20050808/bc72826a/attachment.pgp
More information about the Pkg-xfce-devel