static libs ... again

[Hans de Goede]

Rex Dieter wrote:
>> I believe this needs more discussion we all seem to agree that static 
>> libs should be provided if possible, 
> 
> ???
> There have been quite a few dissenters... including my own stance: 
> static libs should in general be omitted, but allowing for exceptions(*)
> 
> (*) If there is good reason otherwise, and packager is willing.
> 
> 

Erm,

Big stupid typo-ish mistake: I meant to write (s/provided/avoided/):

I believe this needs more discussion we all seem to agree that static
libs should be avoided if possible,

Regards,

Hans