> I suggest that we name the packages libfoo-java or in some > cases libfoo-version-java if that are necessary. > > Is that ok if I change the policy in that way?
Fine in general with me, although I have a question about versions. Do we want libfoo-version-java or libfooversion-java? To me a package like libeditline-5-java seems stranger than libeditline5-java, although perhaps that's just me. Of course then libfooversion-java starts to look like the package simply offers bindings to the corresponding C library, which is often not the case. Not deeply fussed either way. Ben.
