[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Changes in t1lib.

On Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 10:57:32PM +0100, Artur R. Czechowski wrote:
> These arguments are good, but...
> All packages which use this library depend on t1lib1. Of course, I can
> provide dummy t1lib1 package which depends on libt1-1 but I do not like
> this idea.

I strongly urge you to overcome that dislike.  IMO a package should
never disappear across a Debian release unless the functionality has
gone missing.  This is the price we pay for package renames, and if it
helps to keep people from renaming packages gratuitously, it's probably
a good thing.

> Dependency chain: other package -> dummy t1lib1 -> libt1-1 looks
> really ugly.

It doesn't to me.  It looks like par for the course for a rename.

Recall that Apt figures out dependency chains for most people.  The only
people you're going to offend with the ugliness are people who already
think like Debian developers.  And in my experience, one can't cross the
street without offending a Debian developer, so don't worry about it.

> If I removed t1lib1 package it would result in grave bugs in all
> dependant packages.

Yes, which is why you shouldn't do it.

> So, I would not like to do it before sarge release.

You might as well.  You're going to end up carrying a dummy package
sooner or later.

> OTOH Build-dependency chain: other package -> dummy t1lib-dev -> t1lib1-dev
> also looks bad, but it concerns less machines: only autobuilders and people,
> which want to rebuild package for themselves.

It looks no better or worse to me.  Same ineffeciency brought about by
the same need to not hose people doing partial upgrades from woody.

> The 1.3.1 release is really old. I would like to have it in a good condition
> for sarge, then focus on 5.0.0 and, later, ask to remove 1.3.1.

Well, if you don't want to unleash 5.0.0 into sarge, then that *is* a
good reason for waiting.

> The 5.0.0 package will be consistent with DP 8.1. BTW, how should
> package with development files be named: t1lib5-dev or libt1-5-dev?

What's wrong with libt1-dev?  Do you expect to have to support
development against multiple versions of t1lib?

G. Branden Robinson                |     Life is what happens to you while
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     you're busy making other plans.
branden@debian.org                 |     -- John Lennon
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: