[aur-requests] [PRQ#3918] Merge Request for libtiff4
smls75 at gmail.com
Fri Aug 21 10:20:57 UTC 2015
As the current maintainer of both packages, I'm not convinced that
merging them is a good idea. Having them separate, makes it easier for
people to specify what soname exactly they need without having to
worry about implementation details like which is a symlink etc.
In an ideal world it could be a single package that
provides=(libtiff3 libtiff4) so that other packages could continue
to list either of them in their 'depends' array. But afaik, the AUR
API and AUR helpers don't support that.
On the other hand, Doug's suggestion does make sense to me:
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 5:06 AM, Doug Newgard <scimmia at archlinux.info> wrote:
> libtiff3 the main package (since that's the upstream soname), then make a
> separate libtiff4 package that just has the symlinks and nothing else. There's
> a lot of other simplification I would do, as well, but it should work as-is.
I'll await the outcome of this merge request; if they stay separate
I'll probably go ahead and do that.
Also, can you elaborate on those other simplifications? (Maybe on the
package comment page rather than here.)
More information about the aur-requests