Re: Would an ABI change of apt for DDTP support still be accepted?

[Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>]

On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 02:35:19AM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:

> > On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 07:13:21PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:

> >> Would you still accept an ABI change of apt to support description
> >> translations into etch?

> > I gather that "ABI change" means an soname change?  In that case, no, sorry,
> > I think it's too late in the release cycle to be changing this for apt.

> I would like to ask you to review again your position. This code is
> around since 3 years ago and in use on Ubuntu too. Are too few
> packages that will need recompile.

And yet the request comes as we should be preparing to feature-freeze apt
*completely* for etch, not thinking about changes that require a recompile
of all reverse-deps.

BTW, I count 18 binary packages that would need a rebuild for this.  This is
a decent-sized library transition in its own right.

> There's no API changes from APT side so just binary NMUs are enough
> AFAIK.

So what is this ABI change that doesn't involve API changes?

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/