[Pkg-silc-devel] Updating SILC Toolkit to 1.0.2

[Jérémy Bobbio]

Hi!

In my opinion, it would be better to switch directly to package 1.1
beta 3.  Debian is currently in the "heavy development" phase, and it
seems a good period for me to give upstream code a wider range of
potential testers.

Another possibility would be an upload of 1.0.2 to unstable, and an
upload of 1.1 beta 3 to experimental.  It also depends on how different
the packages would be on the Debian side.
 
On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 07:01:23PM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> Perhaps we need a plan about how we're going to handle the version
> numbering of the packages and the library?  One that follow's Jérémy's
> link here would be nice:
> 
>  http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html

SILC Toolkit 1.1 beta 3 uses the libtool flag "-release 1.1".  Quoting
dancer's guide:

--- 8< ---
2. Choosing which method to use for versioning

The upstream authors have the liberty of choosing two major methods for
versioning using libtool. -version-info, and -release. -release is used
for unstable libraries that change ABI on every new release. However,
such unstable library package usually don't belong in Debian, because it
will require a rebuild in every dependent package against the new
library package.

-release is recently used more for signifying major releases. Due to the
serial nature of -version-info, SONAME version numbers usually get quite
large fairly quickly. Using new -release value in major library release,
the SONAME version numbers can be re-set to zero. Some people prefer the
lower numbers. 
--- >8 ---

Upstream currently gives "-version-info 1:0:0 -release 1.1" to libtool.
If I'm not mistaken, the new binary package should thus be named
libsilc-1.1-1.

In any case we have to be careful about API or ABI breakage while 1.1 is
still in beta.

Another aspect we need to consider is that we are going to make every
package depending on libsilc-1.0-2 uninstallable right after the new
upload.  We might want to check if the other packages build correctly
with the new version, and if it won't be better to fix the one that
doesn't before a more massive coordinated upload...

Cheers,
-- 
Jérémy Bobbio                        .''`. 
lunar at debian.org                    : :Ⓐ  :  # apt-get install anarchism
                                    `. `'` 
                                      `-   
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-silc-devel/attachments/20070526/fe42a151/attachment.pgp