Re: Which spell checkers to include by default?
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 08:08:42 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen <email@example.com> said:
> [Anthony Towns]
>> Kind of reviving an old thread, but anyway: It also includes, but
>> afaics, probably doesn't need to (anymore):
>> ispell, dictionaries-common, iamerican, ibritish, wamerican
> [Agustin Martin]
>> #416572: ibritish: Should not have priority standard
> We now have aspell, myspell and hunspell as alternatives to ispell,
> and it can be argued that all of them are better than ispell at
> providing spell checking and recommendations for replacements.
> Because of this, I believe it would be a good idea to drop ispell from
> the list of standard packages, and the related packages too (i*, w*).
Are these packages a drop in replacement for ispell?
> If we were to keep a spell checker as part of the default
> installation, I would suggest using hunspell as it is most advanced
> and I am told it support the most languages at the moment. The next
> step would be to change all programs currently using ispell, aspell
> and myspell by default to use hunspell instead. The only package I
> use that are still using ispell is emacs. No idea how hard it would
> be to update, but it would be a good thing to support for example
> Hungarian and Nothern Sami spell checking in emacs. :)
I suggest we have a look at how many other packages are
impacted, and what it would take to effect these changes, before the
decision is taken to drop ispell.
Administration: An ingenious abstraction in politics, designed to
receive the kicks and cuffs due to the premier or president.-- Ambrose
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C