Re: [luabind] Naming library with proper SONAME
* Roberto C. Sánchez [Tue, 10 Mar 2009 18:30:19 -0400]:
> I am curious as to what people generally think of how the libluabind
> SONAME will be going forward. I know that certain packages (like
> libssl) have the complete version in the SONAME, but I can't imagine
> that this is a really good idea. Is this a showstopper for having
> libluabind in Debian, or just for a stable release? Is this
> discouraged, but otherwise permissible?
It’s certainly not desirable. Do you have an estimation of how many
reverse dependencies libluabind will have? Goswin’s remark about API
compatibility is also an important one.
- Are you sure we're good?
-- Rory and Lorelai