The recent thread on names of library packages on debian-devel made me decide that I made a mistake in naming one of my packages. Specifically, the vips7.10 source package creates four binary packages: libvips7.10, libvips7.10-dev, libvips7.10-tools, and libvips7.10-doc. There's no reason for the version number to be in the name of the package since there's no reason to support more than one version of this library at a time.
The vips packages have been in the archive a short time (since late November or so) and only have one reverse dependency: the nip2 package which I also maintain. Renaming the packages now will create a minor nuisance: the small number of users of the package will have to learn a new name for the package, ftp-masters will have to remove these packages that they just approved, and the vips packages will have to go through NEW again. On the other hand, it's better to fix this now than later. Should I do this rename? I think I should because the cost is low (since there are few users) and it's better to do it right. I've read Section 5.9.3 of the developer's reference and understand it clearly. Is that still the best way to go? Basically I would prepare new packages with the correct names and with appropriate Replaces: and Conflicts: lines so that installing the new packages will replace the old packages. Once the new packages clear NEW, I would upload nip2 to depend upon the new packages instead of the old packages and would then request removal of the old packages by posting a bug against ftp.debian.org. Advice welcome and appreciated. Thanks. -- Jay Berkenbilt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.ql.org/q/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
