Re: intent to do a poppler transition

[Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>]

On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 12:01:50PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> > - Since the API changed, shouldn't the -dev package change its name, or
> >   is this information in the Library Packaging Guide controversial?  Or
> >   even if it's generally consensual, should the name still be kept
> >   unchanged because plain libpoppler doesn't guarantee any API anyway? 

> Step 1:
> Looks like ideal move would be to create libpoppler0.5-dev; -glib and
> -qt bindings didn't change API, so they could keep their name.

Six packages build-depend on libpoppler-dev, but I understand that only one
of them is affected by the API change; so it seems my concern about
cost/benefit of changing the package name still applies here.

> Step 2:
> And I will introduce debian specific SONAME for libpoppler, so we are
> not hit by random ABI changes.

Sounds good to me...

Cheers,
-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/