On Thu, 24 Mar 2016 11:59:44 0100 =?UTF-8?B?TMOhc3psw7MgQsO2c3rDtnJtw6lueWkgKEdDUyk=?= <g...@debian.org> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort > <po...@debian.org> wrote: > > On 21/03/16 19:59, Luca Boccassi wrote: > >> Given the change of the -dev package name here, should I roll back and b-d > >> again on libzmq3-dev? I don't mind doing another upload if it's the right > >> thing. > > > > Yes that'd be fine, but there's no rush. > I still would be happier with libzmq5-dev to keep it consistent with > the library name. Sure, once zeromq is removed, it can be libzmq-dev - > I do not see a reason to switch back to libzmq3-dev meanwhile.
Isn't the convention that the -dev package name should stay the same as long as the API is backward-compatible? This way dependents of the library don't have to change anything in their package, the build-depends will stay the same, and the rebuild during the transition will take care of bumping the binary package from ABI X to ABI Y (EG: libzmq3 to libzm5). API changes were incompatible between 1/2 and 3, so changing to libzmq3-dev was necessary. But AFAIK libzmq API changes between 3.x, 4.0 and 4.1 (and the yet-to-be-released 4.2) are all backward-compatible. Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
