Re: Upcoming changes in Tcl/Tk packaging
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Cyril Brulebois <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Hi Sergei,
> (replying to the first part only since it strikes me)
> Sergei Golovan <email@example.com> (2013-09-25):
>> 2. Renaming tcl8.5-dev and tk8.5-dev into libtcl8.5-dev and
>> libtk8.5-dev respectively (the latter packages still provide the
>> former as virtual packages to break as few packages as it could be).
>> This change is not strictly necessary, but the new names follow the
>> common convention for development libraries.
> please don't. Renaming without having a reason is a bad idea, that means
> creating a lot of work for no benefit. (Besides having to adjust a few
> packages in unstable, which you mentioned already, imagine someone
> backporting her packages to previous releases, she gets to carry a diff
> because of “cosmetics”, which isn't nice.)
You are right. The old names tcl8.5-dev and tk8.5-dev are not pretty given
they accompany libtcl8.5 and libtk8.5, but fully replacing them by libtcl8.5-dev
and libtk8.5-dev will take a lot of work. Okay, I'll return the old names for
the -dev packages.
>> 3. Renaming tcl-dev and tk-dev into libtcl-dev and libtk-dev. Since
>> too many packages have versioned build-dependencies on tcl-dev or
>> tk-dev, I chose to retain tcl-dev and tk-dev packages (as
>> meta-packages which depend on libtcl-dev and libtk-dev). Switching to
>> libtcl-dev and libtk-dev can be gradual. Would adding a lintian
>> warning discouraging to use the old names possible?
> Same as above: creating work for no actual benefit.
Nice package name is a benefit to me, though it might not exceed the costs
> If that was triggered by some lintian warnings, just override them and
> be done with it. Lintian isn't here to generate work.
I meant a lintian warning which softly encourages to switch to libtcl-dev from