Re: Library packages: co-installability, build-depends, transitions
Hello,
sorry for joining the discussion late...
On Sun, Aug 02, 2009 at 08:42:14PM +0100, Matthew Johnson wrote:
> In which case, there's no reason to have the symlink, since the jar
> itself will have the API version (and not package version). This gives
> us another option then:
>
> Coinstallable packages but without symlinks
> -------------------------------------------
>
> jars have api version in the name, there are no 'plain' symlinks and
> hence no -dev packages.
>
> + coinstallable old versions
> + transitions don't have to be coordinated
> + no -dev packages
> - transitions need build-dep / rules changes
That sounds like the most sane thing we can do. Even if it imples some work
on the packages we can handle this and its not too different to current
way of doing things.
Cheers,
Michael
Reply to: