[pkg-fso-maint] [Pkg-e-devel] pkg-e stack update for freerunner?
albin.tonnerre at gmail.com
Sun Feb 22 10:32:48 UTC 2009
> Although I see this is strictly not necessary...
> But I was not necessary to rename libevas-engines to
> libevas-0.9.9.050a-engines as well, because renaming pf libevas package is
> enough to handle binary-incompatibility hell, dependences will do the
> I still thing it is ugly to have libevas-0.9.9.050b together with
> We should rename back to libevas-engines, or rename to
I did the latter yesterday. You might be interested in subscribing to
pkg-e-commits , it's relatively low-traffic and that probably would make
it easier for you to track changes.
> Using unversioned libevas-engines name may be better because other packages
> have to depend on it, so versioned libevas-engines name makes maintaince
> of those a bit harder (e.g. have to fix debian/control instead of just
> What do you think?
I completely agree. In fact, I was about to make the same proposal. I'll do
the changes today
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the pkg-fso-maint