[Fedora-packaging] Should vim-X11 conflict with vim-enhanced ?

[Till Maas]

On Tue January 15 2008, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Till Maas (opensource at till.name) said:
> > On Tue January 15 2008, Till Maas wrote:
> > > On Tue January 15 2008, Karsten Hopp wrote:
> > > > I agree with the /usr/bin/vim stuff, but I think a better solution
> > > > would be to add a conflict between vim-X11 and vim-enhanced.
> > > > vim-enhanced is only of use on systems without X11/gtk. On all other
> > > > systems vim-X11 can provide the same (and more) functionality as
> > > > vim-enhanced.
> > >
> > > Ah, the only possible problem I can think of would be that an "update"
> > > from vim-enhanced to vim-X11 may not be possible. It should be possbile
> > > to do
> >
> > Using alternatives would make it easier for users in another case, too.
> > When someone wants to remove X11 from a default Fedora install ans still
> > keep his favourite editor. Then one could install both vim-X11 and
> > vim-enhanced and after removing X11, vim-enhanced would be still there.
>
> Define 'X11'. You can remove the servers just fine.

The X11 that gives the vim-X11 package its name. To be more precise, I meant 
with X11 every package that provides a requirement for vim-X11, that 
vim-enhanced does not have.

Regards,
Till
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20080115/804e1f4c/attachment.sig>