[pkg-fso-maint] shared library in binary-package?

[Nikita V. Youshchenko]

>
> > I agree with the other comments that for this use case, it would be
> > better to just statically link the library into the daemon and let the
> > plugins resolve symbols against it.  While there's an architectural
> > cleanliness to having a shared library that both daemon and plugins
> > link against, and it enables use of things like LDFLAGS=-Wl,-z,defs to
> > ensure you never have plugins with accidentally missing symbols, I
> > don't really think it's worth the tradeoff of maintaining a proper
> > shared library.
>
> The issue being discussed seems debian-specific. Upstream will unlikely
> be not interested in changing things only because debian policies want
> that.

Typos, typos ...
That should read: "Upstream will unlikely be interested in changing things 
only because debian policies want that."