Why new package name libsasl2-2

[Roberto C. Sanchez]

On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 09:59:19AM +0300, Fabian Fagerholm wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-10-17 at 20:11 +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > As you suggested you could try to implement versioned provides by using
> > dummy packages like this, however I tend to think that the very idea
> > (*) is flawed. If the new sasl is ready for prime time there is no
> > need for keeping the old library around. If it is not ready, it should
> > not go into sid but to experimental.
> > 
> > Once you drop the requirement for having two packages containing
> > /usr/lib/libsasl2.so.2 in the achive everything is easy:
> > 
> > Package: libsasl2
> > Source: cyrus-sasl-2.1
> > Depends: libsasl2-2 (= ${binary:Version})
> > Architecture: any
> 
> Ok, let me see if I understood correctly by explaning this in my own
> words:
> 
>      1. We make cyrus-sasl-2.1 (source) produce a dummy libsasl2 which
>         depends on libsasl2-2 (= ${binary:Version}) like above.
>      2. We upload this into sid. (*)
>      3. We ask for removal of the old packages produced by Source:
>         cyrus-sasl2.
> 
>         (*) I'm not saying this is going to happen before or after etch
>         is released, this is another discussion.
> 
> Result:
> 
>       * All packages already built against cyrus-sasl2 (old package)
>         will work with the new one because of ABI compatibility.
>       * All packages which build against the old package will pull in
>         the new package and the build will work.
>       * Over time, packages will switch to depend directly on the new
>         package, and when all packages have switched, we can drop the
>         dummy package.
> 
> Is this correct? Does it cover the transition completely, or did I leave
> something out?
> 

Looks good to me.

> > (It is Architecture: any instead of all only because otherwise it
> > would uninstallable on all slow arch after every upload.)
> 
> Ok, good point.
> 
> > PS: I do hope that upstream is sane and cyrus-sasl-2.1's libsasl2.so.2
> > is indeed ABI compatible. ;-)
> 
> :) Yes, I indeed hope so! Of course, we have to verify this.
> 
No.  I say we throw caution to the wind and just hope nothing breaks :-)

OK.  Just kidding.

Regards,

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
-------------- 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-cyrus-sasl2-debian-devel/attachments/20061018/0e62de45/attachment.pgp