Hi *, some time ago I've made an ITP for gnome-translate [1], which depends on libtranslate, who already had two ITPs which I took over [2]. This latter package provides some binary packages, among which there is "libtranslate-bin", which installs a "translate" executable in /usr/bin/. But there already exist a /usr/bin/translate, and it's provided by the "translate" package, maintained by Anibal Monsalve Salazar <anibal>. I've already filed a bug against his package to see what to do [3]. The problem is that "translate" by <anibal> does only de<->en translations, while "my" translate offers a wider range of options and conversions (and it's expandable, through a XML configuration file). Thus I don't believe that using the alternatives system (which, I admit, I cannot use, since I never needed it for my packages) would be a suitable solution. This is way I suggested him to rename his binary to something less generic than "translate". Is this the Right Way to behave? And what if <anibal> doesn't reply to that bug? Should I file my RFS nevertheless, thus expecting a RC bug filed? Should I rename my binary (and to what? "translate-generic"?!)? Any suggestion/idea/* is very welcome. Kindly, David [1] #462936 [2] #292907 and #418329 [3] #464034 -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature