On Monday 01 April 2013 14:01:34 you wrote:
> On Mon 01 Apr 2013 13:27:52 Joachim Langenbach escribió:
> > > - How stable the API is?
> > The API is not that stable right now, but we are backporting everything
> > possible to the 0 API version, which does not affect the API. So e. g. the
> > current version of Meganizer is using the 0 API.
> > > - According to  you don't actually maintain any other package in
> > > Debian. Packaging libs it's not an easy task, and it's usually not
> > > recommendable for packaging begginners. Please note that I'm not
> > > implying that you are one, but  suggest so :-)
> > Your absolutly right. I'm a beginner in packaging. But to package
> > Meganizer, it is needed to package libengsas first ;-) Actually, I have
> > done my first packaging steps with Meganizer (which, in an early version,
> > was the source of libengsas).
> Non-stable API and a new maintainer are stuff that do not go along very well
> While it's normally correct to ship the lib as a separate package, in this
> case and as long as there is only one app using it, let me suggest you to
> ship it with the app as a bundled lib, without the headers.
May be I bark up the wrong tree, but I think the main advantage for the user
will be lost than. I need to package libengsas in two versions (libengsas -
without KDE usage and libengsas-kde with KDE usage), to let the user choose,
whether he wants to install and use KDE or not. If I package libengsas with
Meganizer, I must also provide all those packages, or the user must use and
install KDE or he never can profit from KDE and it's features. So I made the
choice for the user than and this is especially, what I want to ommit and
developed libengsas for.
But may be the not that stable API is a reason itself, to not add the package.
In this case, I need to wait some time.
> Once you get more used to packaging and the API becomes stable you could
> consider packaging them separately.
> Kinds regards, Lisandro.