openoffice.org-spellcheck-de_20020701-2_i386.changes is NEW
(new) openoffice.org-spellcheck-de-at_20020701-2_all.deb optional contrib/editors
German spellchecking for OpenOffice.org (Austria)
OpenOffice.org does not ship with a spellcheck for foreign languages
such as german because of licensing issues.
.
Some german people therefore created one, which can freely redistrubuted
under GNU GPL.
.
This is the version for Austria with the "Neue Rechtschreibung"
(new) openoffice.org-spellcheck-de-ch_20020701-2_all.deb optional contrib/editors
German spellchecking for OpenOffice.org (Switzerland)
OpenOffice.org does not ship with a spellcheck for foreign languages
such as german because of licensing issues.
.
Some german people therefore created one, which can freely redistrubuted
under GNU GPL.
.
This is the version for the german regions of Switzerland with the
"Neue Rechtschreibung"
(new) openoffice.org-spellcheck-de-de_20020701-2_all.deb optional contrib/editors
German spellchecking for OpenOffice.org (Germany)
OpenOffice.org does not ship with a spellcheck for foreign languages
such as german because of licensing issues.
.
Some german people therefore created one, which can freely redistrubuted
under GNU GPL.
.
This is the version for Germany with the "Neue Rechtschreibung"
(new) openoffice.org-spellcheck-de_20020701-2.diff.gz optional contrib/editors
(new) openoffice.org-spellcheck-de_20020701-2.dsc optional contrib/editors
Changes: openoffice.org-spellcheck-de (20020701-2) unstable; urgency=low
.
* put myself in Uploaders: and changed Maintainer: to
Debian OpenOffice Team <debian-openoffice@lists.debian.org>
* bumped Standards-Version: to 2.5.7 (no changes needed)
Announcing to debian-devel-changes@lists.debian.org
Your package contains new components which requires manual editing of
the override file. It is ok otherwise, so please be patient. New
packages are usually added to the override file about once a week.
You may have gotten the distribution wrong. You'll get warnings above
if files already exist in other distributions.
Reply to: