4 ms·

It not only _is_ the obvious choice, it is _exactly_ what has actually happened in Debian: https://salsa.debian.org/debian/keepassxc/-/commit/7d6d16e3f8de487b12

• jeffalyanak 2y ago
  I don't believe you're correct. It seems like the option that Debian decided on _will_ remove those features for users who are upgrading a package. Users who already have the keypassxc package will need to explicitly switch packages if they want the full one. That's not the same behaviour as described in my quote comment.
  • Liskni_si 2y ago
    Right, I should have been more careful with the word "exactly". I don't think the proposed solution can be implemented, though. If the "keepassxc" package is to be replaced by the two alternatives ("keepassxc-full" and "keepassxc-minimal"), you'd still need a transitional dummy package named "keepassxc". That package would depend on "keepassxc-full | keepassxc-minimal", giving the user a choice to satisfy the dependency by installing either of those. So far so good. What if the user doesn't explicitly choose, though? The idea is that an upgrade would keep the "-full" variant but "apt install keepassxc" would pull in the "-minimal" variant. How do you encode this in Debian package metadata? I think both "apt install" and "apt full-upgrade" will simply choose the first alternative, so you get either "-full" in both scenarios, or "-minimal" in both.