Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > Hi all, > > Here's a draft that - after deciding which solution is best - should > eventually be put into Packaging Guidelines: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/UsingAlternatives > > I tried to list all pros and cons of each solution. > I'm personally hesitating between using %ghost or Provides:, but I'd > prefer the Provides: solution. > If the only con of the %ghost solution is that it conflicts with "files owned by multiple packages are forbidden" I would prefer that. This is similar to the current exception to allow multiple packages to own the same directory when they are not in a hierarchical relationship. We would need to note this reasoning (or link to this) on the Conflicts page. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
