Re: Adding ispell and wordlist policy reference in developers corner
Josip Rodin wrote:
Er, so why does the web page say that SF is the canonical place to get it
from, and the dictionaries-common package has a slightly outdated version?
I must change that of SF being the canonical place to being the
experimental one.
When no unstable branch is active, version in the package is outdated
just the time we take to decide a new package is to be uploaded to
Debian, although the document can have previously been uploaded to the
sourceforge site. As a matter of fact that is what I use to make sure
that it looks exactly as it should look. So, not a serious delay, some
days as much, and only if there is not a serious problem with the policy.
If for whatever reason we start an unstable branch, the document at sf
will match the unstable one and the outdate will be more important, but
the official document in Debian must match the stable, so keeping track
of document at dictionaries-common-dev package is the right choice for
Debian.
If the best version is in the package, then even better, I'll just extract
it with a script and put it on the web pages.
The best 'stable' is in dictionaries-common-dev package, and you are
right, that is the best way to do it. Thanks for doing that. If I can
help to make things easier let me know.
All in all, I'd be happy that you would just consider the move eventually.
Maybe even to a Debian Sourceforge if it ever gets set up (it's planned but
stalled due to some hardware problems). We'll patch something up in the
meantime.
I have been thinking about this for some time, but I am the last one
that come into the project, although both David and Rafael, who wrote
most of the code for this reimplementation of the policy, are
increasingly busy and I finally took over maintainance of core packages
after Rafael's request. As a matter of fact I have administration
permissions in the sf dict-common project, but I am not the project
administrator (Rafael still is).
So, I rather prefer waiting until some sort of Debian Sourceforge is set
to make things simpler, but yes, I am in favour of this migration. At
that time I will hardly see why we are using sourceforge for something
we have the resources, that is something I feel incorrect.
Thanks for your help,
--
=====================================================================
Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid,
(U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554,
email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html
Reply to: