On Mon, 2023-03-20 at 09:46 +0100, Francesco Pretto wrote:
> First: the major change is decoupling the two versions.
Hi,
right, that's perfectly fine, I've no "problem" with it.
> Concluding, just looking at your example inspecting /usr/lib64,
> anything that can't be enforced is just a recommendation, not a rule:
It depends. Using the same pattern helps to work on multiple projects.
You know how "painful" it can be when you work on multiple projects,
each using a different coding style (just as an example).
> in my opinion, the libraries that use a single number for SO
> versioning better understood the point of such versioning. So I ask
> you: how comfortable you are with a SO version in the form x.y.z that
> doesn't match the library version anymore?
Honestly? I do not mind that much. My only point of the first response
was to suggest to stay with something well-established and defined,
something most of the others are used to.
I also stated that the three-digit version might not work that well for
C++ as it works for the C, but I've no evidence/example/... for it.
> I would love also to hear about from other users/packagers.
Definitely, I agree with you. Such changes should be discussed first.
Whatever I write here is solely my own personal opinion. It can
sometimes look like "I do not like what you do", but, please, believe
me, it's not my intention. It can be my communication abilities are
very bad, I'm sorry. I only try to add a different point of view. If
it's more like I'm causing trouble, then let me know. I'm fine to limit
my communication to things I'm more confident about.
Bye,
zyx
_______________________________________________
Podofo-users mailing list
Podofo-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/podofo-users
