On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 11:19:05AM -0500, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: > Could Policy be amended slightly to explicitly permit library source > packages to create a <library>-headers package containing include files?
I would rather see it modified to not forbid it than add a whole paragraph to explicitly permit it. I think the suggested text is much too long. I'm not objecting to the idea; merely the wording. [proposed paragraph elided] > Without this or a similar text, it is not clear to me that source > packages creating <library>-headers binary packages are in compliance > with Policy, which currently says "The development files associated to a > shared library need to be placed in a package called > librarynamesoversion-dev, or if you prefer only to support one > development version at a time, libraryname-dev." I would rather see that last sentence modified slightly to allow a little more flexibility. Perhaps changing "placed in" to "placed in or installed by". Or something along those lines. If you can come up with something like that which allows you to do what you want, without going into excessive and unnecessary detail, I can probably be persuaded to second it. -- Chris Waters | Pneumonoultra- osis is too long [EMAIL PROTECTED] | microscopicsilico- to fit into a single or [EMAIL PROTECTED] | volcaniconi- standalone haiku -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
