On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 12:49:01PM +0000, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote: > > Note that if you do not want to bother with all the complexities related to a > > shared library (in particular the ABI tracking), an alternative is to make it > > a private library of the seygio-bin package (BTW, shouldn’t this package > > simply be called segyio?). But of course, if you do that, it will not be > > possible for other packages to depend on libsegyio. > I want to maintain it shared, because there some plans in our pipeline to make > more things depend on it. Hopefully we can deal with the pain. No problem, this is fine, I just wanted to make sure that a shared library is really needed. > The applications in the segyio-bin package aren't really the goal of the project > (the library and python library is), they just happened to be quick to write and > useful for us. I have no strong opinions on the package being named segyio over > segyio-bin, but I'm happy to change it either way. If the main product of the segyio project is these binaries, then it should probably be named segyio. If these binaries are not the main product, but just a few auxiliary utilities, then segyio-bin is probably a good choice. -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Sébastien Villemot ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ http://sebastien.villemot.name ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ http://www.debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature