Re: Shall we state on naming (again)?

[Sven LUTHER <luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr>]

On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 08:28:36PM +0200, Ralf Treinen wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 05:43:52PM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> 
> > BTW, please don't forget to use correct dependencies with every ocaml
> > package that use bytecode code, even if it is standalone code, it should
> > depend on ocaml-base-3.06, not some other strange stuff. Especially all
> > older (well those in woody at least) such package that do not have both
> > the ocaml-base (>= 3.04) and ocaml-base (<< 3.05) dependencies are
> > _BROKEN_. But then they are in woody, nothing much we can do on this.
> 
> Should we really always restrict dependency to one particular
> upstream version of ocaml? That would be safest, I agree. On the
> other hand it will prevent a new upstream version of ocaml to go
> into testing unless all packages compiled into bytecode are
> ready to go with it.

And remember, if we have to choose between safety and some minor
inconvenience in the non released archive, what do you think we should
choose, given what debian stands for ?

And who will have to fix the bug reports we get when things break ?

Friendly,

Sven Luther