https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1330343 mist@xxxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mist@xxxxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #7 from mist@xxxxxxxxxxxx --- A naive suggestion. The number of users that want haproxy OR firehol is much greater than the number of users that want haproxy AND firehol. Mark haproxy as conflicting with iprange. Mark iprange as conflicting with haproxy. Get the new iprange out as a package. Get the new firehol out as a package. Problem temporarily resolved. A large number of users are then happy. A small number of users are unhappy. The small number of users who need both packages then complain. In time, the unhappy user's complaint is pushed up the Fedora chain of command. Fedora higher-ups determine which package remains named iprange, and the new name of the package that does not remain named iprange. Packages are then renamed. Problem solved. Calling this problem "CANTFIX" is screwing the larger population of users who want firehol OR haproxy, to temporarily protect a tiny population of users who want to use both firehol AND haproxy. And as soon as that tiny population complains, there is a procedure to resolve their issue. Please, can someone move this forward? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx