[upstream here] On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:13:41 +0100 Norwid Behrnd <nbeh...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > So long for a library, change the name.
I don't see why library may not have a descriptive name instead of a short and cryptic one. And the debian package name follows the name of the library it contains. Which is by its pkg-config name: PosixSignalManager Yes, some may find that ugly and long, but it's the libraries name, and discussions on if that name is good should be held upstream. I'm not aware of any debian policy the package name might violate. Also this is a upload to package that recently entered testing but did not build for various release architectures due to tests build on amd64 centric assumptions, which should now be fixed. I think it's important to try to help debian to offer packages on as many architectures as feasable. > > It might be better to rename the package after bookworm became stable. > Given how near we are in the release cycle to the freeze for new packages to enter testing i agree that **if** the name needs changing it is more feasable to do that targeting bookworm+1, but i still think that the name is fine.
