Re: Dependencies on shared libs, take 2
On Mon, 04 Jun 2007, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 10:29:07PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > I agree that the benefits are worth the deal, but we should make clear
> > that the price to pay for these benefits is a continuous effort from the
> > maintainer. Therefore it should not be used by maintainers not aware of
> > its subtleties.
> Considering the number of bugs I see because of maintainers who don't notice
> they need to change package names due to upstream soname changes, or who
> routinely fail to bump their shlibs when new symbols are added, I think
> there is definitely room here for a recommended solution for maintainers
> that aren't watching the subtleties, even without trying to bump
> dependencies based on API extensions.
Would you care to elaborate? (What would you recommend? How do you expect
it to improve the situation with those maintainers?)
Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :