Bug#708566: library -dev naming policy encourages unnecessary transitions
Hi,
At Mon, 20 May 2013 19:33:43 -0700,
Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> writes:
>
> > Perhaps, but I think we just lack better documentation and advice when
> > it comes to shared library handling in general.
>
> > There was an attempt by Junichi Uekawa (CCed) some time ago [L], but
> > AFAIR some people shunned it because supposedly it contained inaccuracies
> > or suboptimal advice (I've to confess I never reviewed it). IMO these
> > should have been corrected instead of trying to banish it from Debian.
> > I think something like that should be revived, reviewed and subsumed
> > into the policy manual or the devref.
>
> > [L] <http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html>
>
> I'm wholeheartedly in favor of this, and even had some thoughts from time
> to time about helping with (or adopting) that guide and rolling it into
> Policy. But I haven't been doing a very good job finding time for Debian
> things lately. I'd love to see someone take this on.
Some preconditions from that time has changed, and major change since
then has been that binary-only uploads are much easier
infrastructure-wise than before that there's less reason to rename a
-dev package than when this was authored about 8 years ago.
The last time I seriously worked on this document was 2006 and in the
hindsight, I was learning this stuff as I wrote this document, there
must be inaccuracies. But I lack the motivation to revise this
document now.
>
> --
> Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
>
Reply to: