On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 1:24 AM, Eric Lavarde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I thought that Batik 1.7 is not backwards compatible with Batik 1.6 (I > remember vaguely to have issues with this). If I'm right, wouldn't it make > sense to have a batik1.7 package name and keep batik (1.6)? IMO it wouldn't make much sense unless upstream is working on both branches and releasing updates for them. There are only 3 reverse-deps and one reverse-build-dep so it shouldn't be a very big transition anyway. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
