Re: libquazip transition
On 18/07/14 07:05, Eric Maeker wrote:
> Le 18 juil. 2014 à 01:01, Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org> a écrit :
>
>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 23:35:55 +0200, Eric Maeker wrote:
>>
>>> Le 17/07/2014 19:25, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort a écrit :
>>>> May I ask why the -dev package is versioned, instead of simply being
>>>> libquazip-dev, as I think it should be?
>>>
>>> As the ABI version of libquazip has a possibility to evolve, I choose to
>>> include the so version in the package name. This is also a
>>> recommandation I've found in the documentation of shared libraries
>>> packaging.
>> That's a bug in said documentation. -dev package names should only
>> include a version if you intend to ship several versions for an extended
>> period of time.
>
> Thanks for your review and comment. You are right the version of -dev package is only required if maintener intend to ship multiple version of the ABI. There aren t any bug in the doc (see 8.4)
>
> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html
>
> How can we be certain about multiple ABI. Should I ask upstream? Or is that a ´debian only decision´?
The latter. Since you are not renaming the source package, then it doesn't make
sense to rename the -dev package. Renaming (and versioning) only makes sense
when you rename both the -dev package as well as the source, to allow both the
old and new versions to be shipped in testing and a stable release. This is
normally done when the API changed so much that the rdeps need major porting
work and that can't be reasonably expected, especially when there are lots of rdeps.
So you can probably rename your package to libquazip-dev. Since that's what the
rdeps build-depend on, they shouldn't need any changes. Don't forget to add the
appropriate Conflicts/Replaces if you rename the package.
Cheers,
Emilio
Reply to: