Dear Andreas, thank you very much for the feedback. One more question then: can I keep the old package name and still provide libraries named libpp-core3, libbpp-seq3, etc, or should I remove the interface version from the library names as well (this is possible but rather cumbersome from our side, since we have used those new names for several years now, to avoid conflicts while the old versions were still in use)?
Best regards, Julien. On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 10:35 PM Andreas Tille <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Julien, > > Am Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 08:57:14PM +0100 schrieb Julien Y. Dutheil: > > Dear Deb-Med, > > > > After many years, we are finally ready to release the V3.00 of the Bio++ > > libraries (libbpp-core, libbpp-seq, libbpp-phyl, libbpp-popgen, > > libbpp-seq-omics, libbpp-phyl-omics, libbpp-qt, libbpp-raa). This new > > version introduces a new interface, not backward-compatible (although > some > > legacy classes have been kept to ease the transition). Therefore, we have > > renamed the libraries as libbpp-core3, libbpp-seq3, etc. > > It has been a long time since I dived into Debian packaging, but I expect > > that releasing this new version by tagging our master branch will trigger > > some issues for the Debian packaging, since this should be new Debian > > packages, not just updates of the existing ones, right? > > I admit I would prefer to keep the same source package name and bump > SOVERSION of the binary package. The only reason change the source > package name would be that both (old an new) versions should be kept > both inside Debian. Given the relatively low user base I do not > consider it a good idea to tackle the according maintenance burden. > > > Before we create such a mess, are there any recommendations on how we > > should proceed? My gut feeling is that we should get rid of the old ones > > and make some brand new packages for this new version, unless there is a > > simpler way? (The compilation chain is the same as before, no change from > > that side apart from upgrading the various cmake files.) > > The Debian Med team is fine with wirking on the Dabien packages and I > would strongly prefer to keep the old source package names and the > Git repository where these are mentioned. > > Kind regards and thank you for working on the upstream code and for > pinging here > Andreas. > > -- > https://fam-tille.de >
