On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 04:10:12PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Patrice Dumas (pertusus@xxxxxxx) said: > > > If a package's entire function has been subsumed by another package, there's > > > no point in going through an orphan cycle. > > > > There can be different packages providing the same functionality in > > fedora. The criterion is the presence of a maintainer (and passing the > > review). > > Not always. For example, we have obsoletes in perl for modules that moved > into the base perl distribution. There's no reason to go through an orphan > cycle for that. Agreed, renaming and merging of packages doesn't need to go through the orphan process, and there are also certainly other cases, like fedora specific packages that are not needed anymore, but it doesn't seems to be the case here. > Similarly, if the entirety of gnome-volume-manager is poking > interfaces that no longer exist, there's really no point to orphaning it. It depends. If these interfaces can be brought up with a compat package, it may make sense. -- Pat -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
