This is starting off a fresh thread, on the proposal being suggested around naming of packages, that have shared libraries in them.
Maciej was kind enough to write up a web page for it, here: http://wiki.opencsw.org/packaging-shared-libraries I have made some very minor updates to it, and corrected the naming length "32" to "29" . I then added some areas of concern that I have, to the bottom of the page. I was originally going to quote them here, but they have become rather long :-/ So perhaps they are better read in the full context of the wiki page, above. I will also mention, given that Maciej gave the debian sharedlibs policy (section 8.1) as a reference, if we abided by the WHOLE text of that section. Again, my further notes on that, are at the bottom of the wiki page. General comment I did not add into the wiki: I do not see having "more packages" as a good in and of itself (and neither does Debian, as I reference in the page). If upgrading "libcups" -- what was previously a single package -- now takes downloading and cycling through (pkgrm, pkgadd) **6** times... I dont think this looks good to our users. _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
