On 2006-11-29 Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 04:50:53PM +0200, Fabian Fagerholm wrote:
>> We ask you to take a look at the cyrus-sasl2 package in unstable and >> decide if it's fit for etch. If not, we'd appreciate a list of the >> blocking issues. If it is fit for inclusion, please advise on what we >> need to do, if anything. > Just as a side comment, I notice that the package in unstable still includes > a -dev package named libsasl2-2-dev. Why? IMHO there's no value whatsoever > in renaming the -dev package. I thought we had discussed this and I > persuaded you to revert this, but maybe we only talked about the plugin > package names? Hello, Afair the outcome was that it was ok to rename to libsasl2-2 and libsasl2-2-dev so I guess ther has been a small misunderstanding. > Anyway, that's not a blocking issue by any means; it just makes me a little > nervous to hear about maintainers switching to build-depending on this new > package name, which is by its nature far less stable than the existing > libsasl2-dev name. I see. The ABI might change (soname bump) but the API would not necessarily break that horribly that renaming the dev-package is called for, stuff would just need to be rebuilt. - Using the soname in the dev-package's name would break that. cu andreas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
