[Fedora-packaging] Policy question: how tight should cross-subpackage Requires be?

[Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams]

On Mon, 2008-05-05 at 12:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Given a single SRPM generating multiple sub-RPMs, some of which depend
> on each other, how hard should the maintainer try to ensure that
> matching versions of the sub-RPMs are installed?  Possible answers
> include:
> 
> 1. Do nothing, rely on automatically generated requires (eg, the major
> version of a shared library's soname).  Maximum flexibility, maximum
> possibility of allowing installations that don't actually work.

Show me a package that would break if a different version library was
used that has the same soname and I'll show you a developer that needs
to learn how to properly use sonames.

-- 
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ivazqueznet at gmail.com>

PLEASE don't CC me; I'm already subscribed
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/attachments/20080506/c89467c4/attachment.bin