obsoleting -selinux subpackages

[Ville Skyttä]

On Thursday 05 June 2008, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 06:16:47PM +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> > That would break scripts etc that assume the cyphesis-selinux package is
> > still available (either as a real package, or a Provides somewhere else).
> >  Why would it be a good thing to intentionally cause this breakage?
>
> It seems to me that in some case (and here it could be such a case) it
> is acceptable not to be backward compatible, here in order to have the
> stand-alone cyphesis-selinux package completly disappear,

Which is taken care with Obsoletes.

> and avoid inflating the number of provides.

That's completely moot in the context of avoiding breakage.  There's a very 
real, valid reason why the guideline for renaming/replacing packages exists 
and should be followed.