Excerpts from Peter FELECAN's message of Wed Dec 29 05:05:26 -0500 2010: > Of course the _dev (and not -dev) is the choice but this will > provoke some package name changes which is not a great deal in my > opinion.
Of all the renames we could trigger, the 'devel' splits should be the least harmful, and possibly the easiest to handle. The primary package could declare itself I with the old name and the package splitting would create the new, standard name. On package upgrade, the admin would see a fairly obvious message about the old dev package and note that he/she should investigate it. It's not ideal, but it should be much easier than some other renames. I'd prefer to standardize on the short -dev and _dev if we can for the reasons that you noted. Thanks -Ben -- Ben Walton Systems Programmer - CHASS University of Toronto C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302 _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
