On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 02:03 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > > Am 30.10.2012 01:58, schrieb Adam Williamson: > > On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 01:20 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > >>> Well, we could also take the approach we take with MTAs; have a set of > >>> generic virtual Provides for MySQL-alikes and have all the MySQL-alikes > >>> we package Provide these, as well as Providing their own specific name, > >>> and conflict with each other. Just like postfix, qmail and sendmail all > >>> Provide: smtpd and conflict with each other. > >> > >> you can not compare a more or less standalone MTA with a package > >> like mysql-libs where endless packages linked against! > > > > I didn't compare anything. I suggested that the _mechanism_ we use in > > that case may also be appropriate in that case _if_ the circumstances > > merited it. I explicitly stated that I didn't know whether the > > circumstances actually do make it a sensible choice. I just floated the > > possibility. > > > > I do wish you'd read with a bit more subtlety sometimes, Harald > > don't get me wrong but where is subtlety necessary here? > > * mysql-libs is a widely used and linked library > * postfix/sendmail/exim is a binary with alternative symlinks > > different worlds > different implications You're entirely missing the point. I suggested a *packaging mechanism* that we use in another situation. Not a policy. The mechanism of having 'virtual provides' which multiple packages can each satisfy is proven to be an effective way of coping with a situation where multiple packages can provide a given function. I suggested that it could be used _if_ this case matches that description. Just because I mentioned sendmail and I mentioned mysql does not mean I am 'comparing' them. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
