fftw advice...

[Patrice Dumas]

On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 08:17:46AM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> 
> So, I was leaning toward following rpmforge's fftw/fftw3 naming scheme,

Although naming fftw3 the newer version seems acceptable to me,
especially if upstream breaks api now and then, naming the old version
fftw seems wrong to me. Would rpmforge people accept to rename fftw to
fftw2, and leave the latest at fftw3?

> If 2 is the correct answer here, I'm not sure I'm willing to subject myself
> to the further pain/effort of a review (unless someone chimes in quickly to
> offer to review it).

I could do that (if needed), after all it is just a rename.

--
Pat