Re: [2002-03-10] Release Status Update
On Tuesday 12 Mar 2002 3:59 am, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> I would say that's nick@debian.org's decision to make. He isn't
> saying at this point.
Yes, it's totally his decision, I was merely curious. :)
> Especially if there's some concern about shared lib breakage, I'd
> advocate keeping 1.2 until they get it figured out. If this means we
> release woody with 1.2, well, worse things have happened.
The problem is not really serious as far as I can tell the only dependencies
of libxalan are packages built from the same source. However the current
scheme of changing package name on every minor version (e.g. libxalan1.2,
libxalan1.2-dev) is suboptimal IMO.
Reply to: