[csw-maintainers] An idea for a shared libraries policy

[Philip Brown]

I did not see anything in the proposal that mentioned how to handle
catalog naming; only svr4 package names. that is why it seems so
clean.
once you step into that realm things become more messy.
remember that upstream numbering is sometimes out of sync with the lib
numbering.

your proposal may "simplify" the number of versions of a library per
package . however, it will *add* complexity to the naming and package
building process in other ways.

I'm not neccessarily against it. I'm just pointing out it isn't
neccessarily the "simple" choice