> According to Debian Policy 8.6.2, renaming of the SONAME and the > library package name is possible for non-backwards compatible ABI > changes.
Respectfully, the soname was not bumped. If you think that it should be, why don't you ask the sane-backends developers to do that? But I agree with the analysis done in https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=913125#52 and I think the sane-backends developers will agree that a soname bump isn't necessary either. It is unnecessary and unwanted to bump the Debian library package name when symbols are changed or removed if they are not part of the public API. It feels to me like there is widespread agreement that the 1.0.27-3.1 packaging is the best way to handle this (although we should clean up the symbols files in a future upload). Jörg, what can we do now to make you happy with this situation so that we can let this version migrate to Testing and end this dispute we've had for 3 months? Thanks, Jeremy Bicha
