Review Needed: sqlite2

[seth vidal]

On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 18:08 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 11:45 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 12:45:35AM +1000, djh wrote:
> > > Why not just revert the package renaming (sqlite3 to sqlite) that caused 
> > > these problems?
> > 
> > Because it's the normal standard for the current version of a package to
> > not have a number smashed into its name.
> 
> iif the package is 100% backward compatible or if the new package and
> all packages depending on it are replaced at once.
> 
> If this doesn't hold, the most simple way to work around potential
> upgrading and compatibility issues is to leave the old package as it is
> and to use a different name for the new one.
> 
> A less simple way would be to re-package the old package into "compat-
> packages".
> 
> Renaming an already released package and continue to use the old name
> for a new, incompatible package means asking for trouble.
> 

you mean like glibc does all the time?

come on - fedora repeatedly brings in new, api/abi incompatible library
updates as the same package name. The old one gets renamed, no the new
one.

-sv