Re: Dictionaries
Hi Chris,
Chris Halls wrote:
> > I put an eye on the DE version, and don't seen much "specialities"
> > (though there are because it supports de_CH, de_DE, and another one).
>
> Rene 'generates' the Australian dictionary by copying the German one,
> although I think the same thing could be achieved by adding two lines to
> dictionary.lst for the one dictionary.
You mean Austrian :)
Anyways, how do you think should this work?
I do not think so. If we would have two lines in dictionary.lst then
we have to put the corresponding things into -spellcheck-de-de.
Then we have -de-de and -de-ch. Some people won't consider that there
is a -de-at available and this is contained in the -de-de package.
Someone may think that this is no problem because that users get the
Austrian dictionary too if installing -de-de. But who knows?
Should we rename the whole thing into -de-de-at and -de-ch and thhe
decription of the packages accordingly? First looks a bit ugly to me...
I wanted to make it simple and intuitive :)
A empty package depending on -de-de and adding a new line to
dictionary.lst would in my opinion _not_ the solution.
On IRC, you proposed an solution with virtual packages where I do not
understand how this should work.
If you do a Provides: openoffice.org-spellcheck-de-at for the
openoffice.org-spellcheck-de-de package the problem *does not* go
away, because you *can't* install openoffice.org-spellcheck-de-at with
apt-get. You'll see no austrian dictionary package in any list
(dselect / aptitude / apt-cache) either.
It may work, but it again may confuse people...
Or what are you _really_ proposing to do?
Regards,
Rene
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-openoffice-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: