Re: transition: bullet 2.83.6

2015-11-08 Thread Markus Koschany
Am 07.11.2015 um 11:47 schrieb Andreas Beckmann: >> I intend to rename the binary packages from >> >> xxx2.83v5 to >> xxx2.83v6 > > IMHO, xxx2.83.6 would be more intuitive. > > Also given this versioning scheme, upstreams next soversion will likely > be 2.84, making a Debian-local soversion chang

Re: transition: bullet 2.83.6

2015-11-08 Thread Julien Cristau
On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 00:23:31 +0100, Markus Koschany wrote: > Hello release team, > > I am seeking advise how to handle bug #801914 correctly. > > Apparently upstream made a backward-incompatible ABI change between > version 2.83.5 and 2.83.6 without changing the SONAME too. > > I have read

Re: transition: bullet 2.83.6

2015-11-07 Thread Andreas Beckmann
> I intend to rename the binary packages from > > xxx2.83v5 to > xxx2.83v6 IMHO, xxx2.83.6 would be more intuitive. Also given this versioning scheme, upstreams next soversion will likely be 2.84, making a Debian-local soversion change from 2.83 to 2.83.6 would be another option. That should als

transition: bullet 2.83.6

2015-11-06 Thread Markus Koschany
Hello release team, I am seeking advise how to handle bug #801914 correctly. Apparently upstream made a backward-incompatible ABI change between version 2.83.5 and 2.83.6 without changing the SONAME too. I have read TransitionBestPractices [2] and the wiki suggests to rename the binary packages