Hi! Paul Wise and I are working on etl, and we've received a bug report (#354069) about our choice of naming of etl-dev, the only binary package this source package produces. etl-dev is a header library -- it only contains C++ header files that can be used at build time. We are working on two packages which will build-depend on it. Is the bug report (#354069) correct? Does policy really say that the -dev package must be named lib<libraryname>-dev? To me, section 8.4 seems to say that the name should be <libraryname>-dev. Since the name of this library is etl, the name would be etl-dev. Can anyone clarify? -- Fabian Fagerholm <fabbe@paniq.net>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part