Alessandro Ghedini <al3x...@gmail.com> writes: > Hi, > > On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 08:12:15AM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote: >> There are a few issues with the library: upstream makes no attempt at >> versioning it yet, so the packager will either need to convince >> upstream to at least use the package version in the SONAME, or find >> another workaround - or in the worst case, keep it out of Debian until >> upstream starts to version it properly. > > Uhm, really? There seem to be nothing wrong. Given that this is the first > version is normal to have 0.0.0 as interface numbers, it's just how libtool > is supposed to work [0]: "Never try to set the interface numbers so that > they correspond to the release number of your package".
The upstream README states that they do not attempt to version the library at all: ,---- | Library versioning: we don't make any attempt to version the library at | this stage. Classes are in our experience highly stable once they are | built and tested, the only changes typically being added methods. `---- Indeed, there is nothing wrong with 0.0.0, as long as that's intentional, and future releases will have a different version, which to my understanding, is not the case in czmq's case. > Anyway, why not call the source package czmq instead of libczmq? That seems > the name used by upstream. Yeah, czmq should be the source name. I'm not quite sure why I wrote libczmq - I guess I was thinking too much ahead :) >> I plan to package this library at some point in the not too distant >> future, unless someone beats me to it (hence the RFP and not ITP). > > I would like to help if you need so (e.g. co-maintaining the package). Sounds like a good idea, thank you! > I've done a quick and dirty initial try to package this, and it > doesn't seem that hard. Please let me know. I'd love to have a look at your packaging. -- |8] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org