Hi Robert, > On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 18:00 +0100, Robert Jordens wrote: >> The original versioning scheme was decided upon by Junichi and me mainly >> due to lines 40-42 in the configure.ac file. The policy was stressed >> many times on the jack mailing list. > > The real reason for keeping the version in the package name was this: > > http://jackit.cvs.sourceforge.net/jackit/jack/configure.ac?revision=1.84&view=markup > 7 dnl --- > 8 dnl HOWTO: updating the JACK version number > 9 dnl > 10 dnl major version = ask on jackit-devel :) > 11 dnl minor version = incremented when any of the public or internal > 12 dnl interfaces are changed > 13 dnl micro version = incremented when implementation-only > 14 dnl changes are made > 15 dnl --- > 16 JACK_MAJOR_VERSION=0 > 17 JACK_MINOR_VERSION=102 > 18 JACK_MICRO_VERSION=5 > Thanks for the clarification. So, if I understand correctly, the reason for keeping the version in the package name (and in the library install directory) does not hold anymore, now that jack developers have taken responsability over possible changes, right?
If so I think we could drop these patches: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/demudi/jack-audio-connection-kit/trunk/debian/patches/02_release-in-libjack-name.patch?op=file&rev=0&sc=0 http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/demudi/jack-audio-connection-kit/trunk/debian/patches/04_configure_in_jack_version.patch?op=file&rev=0&sc=0 and rename the library packages accordingly, something like libjack0 and libjack-dev or libjack0-dev. What do you think? Ciao, Free -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
