Michael Tautschnig wrote: >> I'm also working on good short and long descriptions and >> binary package name. >> Suggestions are welcome. > Could you please also bug upstream about renaming this library? "classlib" is > just as good as naming it "lib" only, in a C++ context. Yeah I know that it's really generic but I think it shouldn't be a problem unless a source package named "classlib" already exists and would conflict with this one. As you can see at download location, that's the library name since 2001. Also for that reason, I'm looking for a _binary_ package name less generic, not source. > > On the other hand, as it is only needed as a dependency of iSpy, why not ship > it > together with iSpy sources and don't even build specific binary packages? Do you mean aggregating 2 tarballs in one source package (or using classlib version that comes with iSpy) and building 2 binary packages (ispy and classlib)? Correct me if I'm wrong. In that way, each time a new ispy release is out, I should also rebuild and upload classlib even if it's not changed, correct?
An alternative way could be shipping it with iSpy sources (to satisfy dependency) as you said, and then packaging iSpy only? That's the simplest way but is it doable? Only adding a section in debian/copyright? But in that way, classlib would lose its identity. Cheers, Gabriele -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org