Library naming inconsistency between static and shared

[AndreFavotto]

Hello,
Version 113.0.33-1 introduced the build and installation of dso files in addition to the static ones, which is great for my use case. Thanks for that!

I noticed however that the DSO file was named libadslib.so, fully lowercase, as opposed to all other names of folders and files that are always PascalCase (AdsLib.a, AdsLib.h, AdsLib.cpp, etc). Is there any specific reason for that choice?

For context as to why I ask:
I submitted some time ago a conda-forge package of this library which I still maintain. Since until now DSOs were not available, I added them via patch to meson.build to create an AdsLib.so file, following the same format as other names.

Now I could finally get rid of that patch on the latest release, but I would still either need to patch it back to PascalCase to keep retro-compatibility to the DSOs for prior versions or introduce a breaking change to previous users.

Is the goal to follow with the lowercase naming for the DSO only?

[pbruenn]

Ooops, sorry. Normally I am very pedantic about these names, but somehow this slipped past me.
That said, I'd prefer:
adslib_so = shared_library('AdsLib',
instead of the current:

ADS/meson.build

Line 98 in 77953d5

adslib_so = shared_library('adslib',

@stlehmann would that be okay with you, or would it cause too much churn for pyads?

[AndreFavotto]

I would also strongly prefer what you suggested, as we have already released a couple of conda packages using this name and it would keep things consistent.