On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 08:27:52 +0100, MC (Milan) wrote: > > "Renamed"? If so, it would be just another example why our Package > > Renaming Process is flawed and only adds tiresome bureaucracy for > > those who follow it. > > Hi, > I'm sorry for a confusion, it wasn't meant like real "rename of a > package", I did not know internals for the change, for me it was > "renamed", but as Matthias explained, it was not a package rename. No problem, but doesn't change much with regard to my opinion. _Replacing_ existing packages is also covered by the packaging guidelines, https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Renaming.2FReplacing_Existing_Packages including an explanation how to handle the "Obsoletes" and "Provides". Even the case when to add only "Obsoletes" is commented on. -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
