[Fedora-music-list] Re: package naming question: muse -vs - MusE

[Quentin Spencer]

Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-05-08 at 21:17 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
>   
>> On Mon, 2006-05-08 at 23:34 -0400, Russell Harrison wrote:
>>     
>>> Out of curiosity,
>>>
>>> Assuming that the current extras package was renamed would it only be
>>> implemented in the current development / future versions?  Using RPM
>>> how would we go about upgrading the current package to the new name.  
>>> Using obsoletes would work initially to replace it if there wasn't a
>>> new package coming in with the same name.  That would then cause
>>> anyone installing emacs-muse after muse to have their muse package
>>> removed. 
>>>
>>> What is the proper way of doing this?  My understanding of RPM leads
>>> me to believe that the "cleanest" way to include the new muse package
>>> in FC5 is for its package to be renamed, even though the current
>>> package is the "proper" candidate for renaming.  The other option is
>>> to change the names for FC6+ and call it done. 
>>>
>>> Am I right about this or is there a mechanism I'm unaware of?
>>>       
>> I think (not sure) you can have emacs-muse obsolete specific versions
>> ranges of muse, but I'm not positive.
>>
>> Personally - I say do the emacs-muse thing now, as in yesterday, with
>> obsolete/provides for muse.
>>
>> Then in FC-6/devel, drop the obsolete/provides.
>>
>> FC-5 users will have muse replaced with emacs-muse and then when fc-6 is
>> released, they will get an emacs-muse that does not obsolete muse - and
>> can install this other package.
>>
>> People trying to yum update from FC-4 to FC-6 really should make a pit
>> stop in FC-5 first anyhow.
>>     
>
> It is regretful that the existing (emacs) muse version is 3.02.6b is
> higher than the (sequencer/audio recorder) muse version (0.8.1a). 
>
> Which means that fc5 Planet CCRMA users would not be able to install
> (audio) muse as emacs-muse would obsolete it, right?
>
> Unless emacs-muse obsoletes just the current version of muse in extras. 
>   

Do I dare suggest that this might be a place where using an epoch might 
be justified?

-Quentin