* Rafael Laboissiere <raf...@debian.org> [2009-03-01 13:58]: > Version 3.2 of the lapack library has been released [1] and is now packaged > in experimental (version 3.2.0-1). As regards the version currently in > unstable (3.1.1), the API has changed [2] in the following way: > > [snip] > > I would like to know the opinion of the Release Team on how to proceed. > Since the upstream authors do not choose the SONAME and the current one > (liblapack3gf) is a Debian invention, we are now left with two options: > > option #1) Release liblapack3gf_3.2.0 to unstable without changing the > SONAME, hoping that my analysis above is correct and there will > be no breakages. > > option #2) Change the SONAME, release liblapack3.2_3.2.0 (or whichever > name) to unstable and schedule binNMUs for all the rdepend > packages.
I asked the question above over a week ago and got no reaction from the Release Team since then. I suppose that you guys are either too busy with other transitions or think that this API change is not so dramatic. I think that we could go with option #1 above and everything will be fine. If no objections are raised in a reasonable amount of time from now, I will release liblapack3gf_3.2.0 to unstable without bumping the SONAME. -- Rafael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
