Why not to rename the current package into gtk-qt-engine-base and to provide a package gtk-qt-engine which would be empty and depend on both gtk-qt-engine-base and libbonoboui ? This way people who installs libbonoboui would get the right behavior and people who explicitly ask for gtk-qt-engines too.
I would also like to suggest a hack... I do not know if it is feasible with regards to Ubuntu's packaging standards.
The iso version of kubuntu-desktop would suggest gtk-qt-engine and recommend gtk-qt-engine-base. A few days after the release, an update would recommend gtk-qt-engine and do no other changes.
It's ugly but it might works.
Maybe the answer shouldn't be those hacks and maybe we should think about a way to provide some trimed-down package on the CD. If people are interested we could try to find way of doing this, but since I'm far from being a apt guru and I know nothing of Ubuntu's policies, it's very very unlikely that I could find suitable solution.
Hello world !
Why not to rename the current package into gtk-qt-engine-base and to provide a package gtk-qt-engine which would be empty and depend on both gtk-qt-engine-base and libbonoboui ? This way people who installs libbonoboui would get the right behavior and people who explicitly ask for gtk-qt-engines too.
I would also like to suggest a hack... I do not know if it is feasible with regards to Ubuntu's packaging standards.
The iso version of kubuntu-desktop would suggest gtk-qt-engine and recommend gtk-qt-engine-base. A few days after the release, an update would recommend gtk-qt-engine and do no other changes.
It's ugly but it might works.
Maybe the answer shouldn't be those hacks and maybe we should think about a way to provide some trimed-down package on the CD. If people are interested we could try to find way of doing this, but since I'm far from being a apt guru and I know nothing of Ubuntu's policies, it's very very unlikely that I could find suitable solution.