On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 10:18:59PM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote: > * 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. > Currently, none of the luabind packages have reverse dependencies (except for stuff like libluabind-dbg depending on libluabind0). Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez http://people.connexer.com/~roberto http://www.connexer.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature