Bug#878941: RFS: sane-backends/1.0.27-1~experimental3

[Jeremy Bicha <jbicha@debian.org>]

On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 4:37 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
<glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> Well, if there are so many people in Ubuntu relying on this package,
> it might be a good idea to step up and help the Debian maintainer of
> the package.

I do help Jörg (and Debian) with improvements when I can. I have
submitted several improvements to the shotwell package for instance
and would like to help with simple-scan too.

> I feel like Joerg deserves an apology. He received lots of thrashing
> even though he kept the 1.0.27 version in experimental to avoid such
> issues. Yes, he (and me, too) overlooked this particular issue with
> the package rename (although there was #870078), but I think that
> could have been communicated better.

I apologize for the reactions he got on that bug. I'll leave a comment
there to encourage people to keep respectful.

>> For Ubuntu 17.10, it looks like the best solution now is to add a
>> transitional package since the Provides didn't work. But for 18.04 we
>> could probably rename the package back to libsane since it doesn't
>> look like there is any need to rename the package (considering there
>> are third-party debs out there).
>
> I think we should make a list to see how many third-party packages
> are actually affected. I don't think it's acceptable to force
> staying at a certain package name due to certain third party
> software. Should we really keep such kludges around forever?

Why change the name in the first place? As I commented earlier, my
guess is that it was only changed to fix a non-urgent lintian warning.
My vote is to keep the old name in Debian until we actually need to do
a soname transition.

Jeremy