On 11/12/18 12:04 PM, Danila Kiver via arch-general wrote:
> Agree, NB 9.0 is a complete headache and probably should not be considered
> an *upgrade* from 8.2. Even upcoming NB 10.0 does not seem to solve
> all the migration issues.
>
> Maybe Apache Netbeans (9.0 and higher) has to be distributed as a different
> package ("apache-netbeans"), conflicting with old "netbeans" package?
>
> This way would allow manual upgrade (by installing "apache-netbeans")
> from old good NB 8.0 to Apache NB when it will be good enough to replace it.
Using inaccurate names is not the solution, if you want the 8.2 version
for any given reason then you can submit an AUR package for netbeans8.
Because this is how legacy versions of a package are *always* packaged,
by using the base name and then suffixing it with the version.
It's not exactly entirely unheard of for major new releases of a
software to need migration, drop features (and hopefully add new ones),
etc. This does *not* mean it is new software entirely, and it should
*not* be named something new.
--
Eli Schwartz
Bug Wrangler and Trusted User
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
