On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 08:27:52 +0100, MC (Milan) wrote:
> "Renamed"? If so, it would be just another example why
> Renaming Process is flawed and only adds tiresome bureaucracy for
> those who follow it.
I'm sorry for a confusion, it wasn't meant like real "rename of a
package", I did not know internals for the change, for me it was
"renamed", but as Matthias explained, it was not a package rename.
No problem, but doesn't change much with regard to my opinion.
_Replacing_ existing packages is also covered by the packaging
including an explanation how to handle the "Obsoletes" and
Even the case when to add only "Obsoletes" is commented on.