On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 10:56:43AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> We already have such practices in place.
Sorry, I had no idea :) Then probably that 'best practice' one would be a
good name suggestion for this case too.
Btw, where is this information? I skimmed again through the Naming
Guidelines, but I cound find no reference.
> Before such effort can take effect, replacing a well established package
> with another one will have to prove its viablity and sustainabilty.
>
> ATM, to me personally, replacing packages with rust package qualifies as
> non-sense, probably based on personal preferences and religion.
Agreed. As long as there is no evident advantage, with no interface change
whatsoever, it could only break the working things which rely on the
original one! But providing a replacement does not need replacing it by
default. :)
--
010 Giovanni [dacav] Simoni
001 <dacav@xxxxxxxxx>
111
OpenPGP key: 93FC 2A6A 43A4 AAC2 0D8E 5411 2F99 ABB6 BA14 DF9E
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
