Bug#1100876: transition: kdsingleapplication
On Thursday, April 3, 2025 12:41:32 PM CEST Peter Blackman wrote:
>
> Hi Sune,
>
> Just to clarify, would that avoid the need for a transition?
>
> In my defence, it seemed incongruous to have upstream version 1.1
> building a binary package named ...-1.0
> but happy to do it that way if that's best.
The number in the package name is an ABI identifier, not a version requirement.
Sometimes they match, sometimes they don't. They often don't.
/Sune
--
I didn’t stop pretending when I became an adult, it’s just that when I was a
kid I was pretending that I fit into the rules and structures of this world.
And now that I’m an adult, I pretend that those rules and structures exist.
- zefrank
Reply to: