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=471527 --- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-11-15 11:28:43 EDT --- Well, * You set the soname of libsnmp++.so by yourself, however this may become confusing even the upstream begins to name the soname of this library differently in the future. For example the upstream may set soname as libsnmp++.so.0.0.0 at first. Also, there is no guarantee that the API of this library won't change when the major version of the tarball doesn't change. c.f. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PatriceDumas#On_not_shipping_shared_libraries_when_upstream_doesn.27t Usually I think when the upstream does not set the soname of the library properly, we should not ship the library. How do you think? -- 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