[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: How should ambiguous package specifications be handled?

From: Christopher Baines
Subject: Re: How should ambiguous package specifications be handled?
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2020 10:16:06 +0000
User-agent: mu4e 1.2.0; emacs 26.3

Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <address@hidden> writes:

> Christopher,
> Christopher Baines 写道:
>> We've had one for a while (itstool 2.0.6), and another has recently
>> been
>> introduced (sassc 3.6.1).
> Thanks for noticing this!
> The sassc variant being visible was definitely a mistake.  I added it
> as a local variable first and forgot to hide it after changing my
> mind.  This is now fixed.

Great, thanks for fixing the sassc issue :)

>> Given there do seem to be ways of avoiding these ambiguous package
>> specifications, would it be helpful to have a lint warning that
>> identifies a package as being ambiguous (as it shares the name and
>> version with another package)?
> That's a good idea at the very least.  I don't think such duplication
> is ever justified.

Good good, I'll add it to my list of things to look at.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]