Re: shared library -dev package naming proposal

[Junichi Uekawa <dancer@netfort.gr.jp>]

Hi,

> > I'd like to propose, for new -dev packages, to 
> > name -dev packages after their runtime library counterparts.
> > 
> > If the library package is named lib$NAME, 
> > call the -dev package lib$NAME-dev.
> [...]
> 
> Hej,
> The obvious downside of this is that the name of dev-package will change
> although the API did not necessarily change. This would increase 
> workload for stuff like the current C++ transition and makes backporting
> more difficult.

Thanks for pointing these points out.
My impression is that your point can be addressed as follows:

1. libwhateverXXX-dev can (and in most cases must) provide
   (and conflict) with libwhatever-dev, 
   so the first point is moot.

2. However, versioned depends will suffer, but having a versioned 
   depends will make moot the problem with backporting and C++ transition.


There may be other showstoppers.


I would really like this 10-year old non-regulation to 
go to a concensus (it is indeed rather embarassing we don't 
agree on a good solution after 10 years...)



regards,
	junichi