Wed, 18 May 2005 22:21:20 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 08:49:54PM +0200, Emanuele Rocca wrote:
> * Simon Huggins <firstname.lastname@example.org>, [2005-05-18 16:04 +0100]:
> > If we want it to be usr/bin/Terminal then:
> > - either we conflict
> Other people can easily add Conflicts or whatever they want to their
> debs; we cannot, because we are providing *official* packages for
> Debian. And I don't think it is acceptable to force our users to keep
> *only* the GNUStep Terminal or the Xfce one when there are *no
> technical reasons* leading to mutual exclusion (also if I don't want
> to believe that there is someone actually using GNUStep). ;)
Yeah I think you and Alex might be right.
> > - or we use dpkg-divert which is a bit evil and hard to ensure
> > you do correctly in all upgrade/downgrade/removal cases.
> > Also I believe this means you need cooperation from the
> > terminal package.
> I don't like this solution too.
> > I would prefer Terminal.
> I would prefer xfce4-terminal. :P
I think I'm coming around to xfce4-terminal.
> Keep always in mind that one of our duties is the integration of
> upstream software in Debian, which is quite a complex environment. We
> must do our best to coninvce upstream authors to choose reasonable
> names and to avoid ambiguity.
Hey, I tried for a bit but yeah it's hard.
> P.S. Please always try to be as peaceful as possible; however, as a
> non-native english speaker I perfectly understand that is not always
> easy to be clear. Is this sentence clear? :)
Yes, that's clear ;)
----------( Granny grasped her broomstick purposefully. )----------
----------( "Million-to-one chances," she said, "crop up )----------
Simon ----( nine times out of ten." )---- Nomis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----