Re: New cyrus-sasl2 for etch?
On 2006-11-29 Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 04:50:53PM +0200, Fabian Fagerholm wrote:
>> We ask you to take a look at the cyrus-sasl2 package in unstable and
>> decide if it's fit for etch. If not, we'd appreciate a list of the
>> blocking issues. If it is fit for inclusion, please advise on what we
>> need to do, if anything.
> Just as a side comment, I notice that the package in unstable still includes
> a -dev package named libsasl2-2-dev. Why? IMHO there's no value whatsoever
> in renaming the -dev package. I thought we had discussed this and I
> persuaded you to revert this, but maybe we only talked about the plugin
> package names?
Hello,
Afair the outcome was that it was ok to rename to libsasl2-2 and
libsasl2-2-dev so I guess ther has been a small misunderstanding.
> Anyway, that's not a blocking issue by any means; it just makes me a little
> nervous to hear about maintainers switching to build-depending on this new
> package name, which is by its nature far less stable than the existing
> libsasl2-dev name.
I see. The ABI might change (soname bump) but the API would not
necessarily break that horribly that renaming the dev-package is
called for, stuff would just need to be rebuilt. - Using the soname in
the dev-package's name would break that.
cu andreas
Reply to: