On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 4:37 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote: > Well, if there are so many people in Ubuntu relying on this package, > it might be a good idea to step up and help the Debian maintainer of > the package.
I do help Jörg (and Debian) with improvements when I can. I have submitted several improvements to the shotwell package for instance and would like to help with simple-scan too. > I feel like Joerg deserves an apology. He received lots of thrashing > even though he kept the 1.0.27 version in experimental to avoid such > issues. Yes, he (and me, too) overlooked this particular issue with > the package rename (although there was #870078), but I think that > could have been communicated better. I apologize for the reactions he got on that bug. I'll leave a comment there to encourage people to keep respectful. >> For Ubuntu 17.10, it looks like the best solution now is to add a >> transitional package since the Provides didn't work. But for 18.04 we >> could probably rename the package back to libsane since it doesn't >> look like there is any need to rename the package (considering there >> are third-party debs out there). > > I think we should make a list to see how many third-party packages > are actually affected. I don't think it's acceptable to force > staying at a certain package name due to certain third party > software. Should we really keep such kludges around forever? Why change the name in the first place? As I commented earlier, my guess is that it was only changed to fix a non-urgent lintian warning. My vote is to keep the old name in Debian until we actually need to do a soname transition. Jeremy
