On 2012-09-28, Stephen Kelly <[email protected]> wrote: > On Friday, September 28, 2012 13:25:42 Thiago Macieira wrote: >> I've already contacted several downstreams: Sune for Debian, Will for >> OpenSUSE, Raphael for FreeBSD; the Fedora people were the originators of the >> bug report and have posted here. >> >> All have given their +1 to the proposal. > > Thanks for doing that. > > I'm very surprised that they didn't email here about it and join the > *discussion*. This should involve more than a +1 imo but an actual discussion.
I have tried contributing, but the gmane setup of this list was wrong, and hopefully it works now :) >> Sune also said that he would rather we *keep* the number at the end of the >> soname. As to whether we should reset to 1 or keep it at 5, Lars says he >> would rather we keep at 5, so no one gets ideas about making a >> binary-incompatible Qt 5 release. yep. Most of debian's tools (not only the debian qt/kde team's tools) relies on libraries being on libfoo.so.X form. And I also agree with Lars. I don't have any opinion on if we want to make it libQt5Stuff or libQtStuff5. /Sune - partially also writing this email as a test to see if gmane now works _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
