On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 08:25:41AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Paul Elliott wrote: > > ... > > Your mail doesn't include which package/data you are talking. It is > very hard to give you correct advice when we aren't being given the > necessary information about the situation we are responding to. > > > I want to create a new package that is identical to the old one except > > that 1) the name of the package is changed. 2) the data files and their > > names are changed. > > What is the reason for wanting the new package? It sounds unnecessary. > > > Would it be a reasonable way to proceed to fork the old package? > > Create a meta-package depending on the old package and containing > symlinks to the old data files. > The new package contains data most people won't want. It is big. 69M But those who need this data, need it. By creating a different package, I give the majority the default of opting out, while giving the few the chance to get the data they need. The new package contains ephermis extrapolated data for far past, and far future dates. Researchers can use this data for astronomical historic research like determining the date of the Mahabarata war. I had already decided on the new package. I was asking about the best way to technical way to execute the fork. The Old package is swe-standard-data, new will be swe-extrapolated-data. (Now in progress). -- Paul Elliott 1(512)837-1096 pelliott@BlackPatchPanel.com PMB 181, 11900 Metric Blvd Suite J http://www.free.blackpatchpanel.com/pme/ Austin TX 78758-3117
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature