[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#424875: ITP: libical0 -- libical offers parsing of ical text data.

On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 16:27 +0200, Wilfried Goesgens wrote:
> * Package name    : libical0

Although I'm might not be up-to-date on the library naming scheme[0],
I'm pretty sure a zero should go on the end of the binary package's
name, only the source package, which is what is being asked for above.

> The ICal library was originaly maintained by Eric Busboom and Andrea
> Campi. Its new Maintainer is Art Cancro.

libical is currently not in Debian, but there is an ITP for libical[1]

Now, looking at this other libical[2], it is clear that it is a
"modified" version of the original libical project, where the original
libical project is what this ITP is for.

So are these two ical libraries both needed in Debian? What is the
difference between them?

> Its used by the Citadel Project, Kontact and Evolution (in forked
> versions). This release contains the patches from the forks.
> The Citadel ITP #423911 depends on this.

Interestingly, when I asked about the other libical's status in the bug
report[1] for another reason, the owner of the bug reported that they
were working on libical for Citadel too -- this is the main thing that
makes me think that there is no need for two these two versions in
Debian, if they both being packaged with Citadel in mind (ie. I assume
they both work with Citadel).

I hope I'm understanding everything here -- I'm no expert on anything
ical-related, otherwise please correct me here!


[1] http://bugs.debian.org/404862
[2] http://www.aurore.net/projects/libical/

Jonny Lamb, UK                               jonnylamb@jonnylamb.com
http://jonnylamb.com                                 GPG: 0x2E039402

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: