On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 06:35:50PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 05:49:12PM +0100, Jérôme Marant wrote: > > Quoting Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > I thus propose the following plan, and an alternative plan below it : > > > > > > Plan A: > > > > > > - we rename lablgtk2 to lablgtk, and it becomes our default lablgtk. > > > - lablgtk2 is linked with libpng12. > > > - camlimage is built with it. > > > - we rename current lablgtk as lablgtk1 for compatibility reasons. > > > - cameleon is either fixed to build with lablgtk2. > > > > I have no real idea but I'm not sure it is wise to make such > > changes if we want to keep our packages in a releasable > > state in testing. > > What about uploading lablgtk1, which does provide lablgtk and slowly > migrate the dependency on lablgtk to dependencies on lablgtk1. > > The real question, is what to do about camlimages. Stefano has said he > has not much time about for it, and it is problematic. > > Will we keep a camlimages1 and a camlimages2 packages, or could we just > go with a camlimages packages which builds on lablgtk2 ? > > What is cameleon's exact dependency on camlimages anyway ? >
I really don't think changing the name of lablgtk will change anything and it will give more work to us to migrate dependency... And i don't think it can give us anything ( or i don't see the point ). Regard Sylvain LE GALL
