Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469972 --- Comment #13 from Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@xxxxxx> 2009-01-01 14:01:41 EDT --- Persuading upstream to implement versioning would be best. I don't think it's necessarily a good idea to invent versioning independently of upstream in the Fedora packages - there may be a good deal of confusion when/if upstream later implements versioning as well and ships a version using the same soname that was earlier used in Fedora for something that's not ABI compatible. And additionally, if the shared lib is left unversioned at least for now, I don't think adding an unversioned soname would add any value either - AFAIK sonames are all about versioning. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review