intent to rename vips7.10 -> vips
Executive summary: I'm planning on renaming the vips7.10 packages to
get the "7.10" out of the package name unless someone tells me that I
shouldn't. I've discussed this on debian-mentors already. Read on
for the copious details.
The recent threads on sonames and package names convinced me beyond a
doubt that I made a mistake in the names of the vips packages. I had
reasons at the time, but in retrospect, they were wrong. I now intend
to rename the packages. I discussed it on debian-mentors and have
prepared everything for upload and have tested it thoroughly, but I
wanted to run it past debian-devel before doing the actual upgrade.
Right now, vips7.10 has only been in the archive for a short time.
There is only one dependent package in the archive which I also
maintain. In other words, this is the right time to correct the
mistake. Right now, the vips7.10 source package creates four binary
packages: libvips7.10, libvips7.10-dev, libvips7.10-tools, and
libvips7.10-doc. My intention is to do the following:
Create new source package "vips" which will create four binary
packages: libvips10, libvips-dev, libvips-tools, libvips-doc. (10 is
the current soname.) Each package Conflicts with the package it
replaces with a version << the future dummy transition version of the
existing packages and Replaces the old package as well. For example:
Conflicts: libvips7.10 (<< 7.10.dummy)
Upload this package and wait for it to clear NEW.
Upload new version of vips7.10 (currently 7.10.8-1) called
7.10.dummy-1 that creates four dummy packages in section "oldlibs"
each of which installs no files (except the mandatory ones in
/usr/share/doc) and depends upon its replacement package. The
Description of the package includes the word "dummy", and is akin to
this, as adjusted appropriately for each package:
Description: transitional dummy package replaced by libvips10
This is the old name for libvips10. It can be safely removed.
Upload new version of the package that depends upon libvips7.10 (nip2)
replacing its dependencies and build dependencies as needed.
(Dependencies will be automatic with the new shlibs file.)
By doing this, anyone who has the current packages installed and does
apt-get dist-upgrade will automatically get the new packages with the
new names. They will also (unfortunately) have the dummy transition
packages, but I see no way around that. Someone who explicitly
apt-get installs the new packages prior to upgrading the old packages
would have the old packages removed. For all the gory details, see
I'm going to ask my usual sponsor to upload these in the next few days
unless someone gives me a compelling reason not to. :-)
In the interest of full disclosure, in the original ITP, David Moreno
Garza <email@example.com> asked why I was including the version number
in the package name and I gave a reason. In retrospect, the reason
wasn't really valid.
Jay Berkenbilt <firstname.lastname@example.org>