Re: Do we want to change libxml2's package name
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 07:15:36PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 Jul 2009, Mike Hommey wrote:
> >> I am now wondering what to do. Doing the change, introducing a
> >> transitional package, shouldn't be disruptive. On the other hand,
> >> leaving the package as it is is doing no harm besides the policy
> >> violation that has been in place for almost a decade.
> >>
> >> What do you think?
> >
> > I agree with Junichi's last comment. Keep the package name as is and
> > update it only next time that the SONAME changes.
> >
> > Many package do not respect this point of the policy. It should be a
> > conventional name to use when you have to rename the package for a SONAME
> > change but it should not introduce a useless transition just for
> > aesthetics.
>
> Please don't change package names unless really needed or really
> confusing especially with libraries, TIA.
I'll just close the bug then. It's useless to keep it wontfix. (and the
SONAME is not going to change any time soon)
Mike
Reply to: