* Junichi Uekawa (dancer@netfort.gr.jp) wrote: > I'd like to propose, for new -dev packages, to > name -dev packages after their runtime library counterparts. Uh, no? The -dev packages have no need to match to a specific runtime library and this just creates unnecessary work. > This allows mechanically determining shared library > package and corresponding -dev package. Eh? How about you go a bit deeper into why that's necessary and how that's not possible today? What problem are you trying to solve with this? > This was raised in the Shared library BOF @ Debconf5 > which was held this morning. Clearly something's missing here 'cause you havn't provided any rational for why this would be a good thing and honestly it certainly looks like a bad thing(tm) to do to me. Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature