[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Please consider unstable dictionaries-common for sarge



Hi,

Sorry for being this late, I was waiting for #299541 and #299725 to be
archived before asking for package passing into sarge, when the last
"editorial change" suddenly (and fortunately, thanks) came.

A summary of changes since the last sarge version (0.24.10). There are
things that should go into sarge, and things that are tested for so long
that no errors are expected, so I think they can be considered for sarge.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
0.24.11 Accepted [2005-03-11]

  * emacsen support:
    - show entries for all {i,a}spell registered dicts
      (closes: #284746, 294961):
    - Simplified the way aspell dict is guessed after LANG. Mostly a file
      reorganization

0.25.0  Accepted [2005-03-16]

  * emacsen support:
    - additional file simplification.
  * Documentation:
    - Added info about possible errors related to debconf
      type 1 db corruption
  * Put a list of installed ispell dicts in file
    /var/cache/dictionaries-common/ispell-dicts-list.txt.
    This is required by fix of squirrelmail bug #283948 [Please integrate
    squirrelmail with dictionaries-common]. If this is not present will
    work, but not integrated with the dict-common system

0.25.2  Accepted [2005-03-30]

  * Documentation fixes:
    - Typo fix (#299720)
    - Document how emacsen entries can be customized.
    - Reorganized documentation.

0.25.3  Accepted [2005-04-08]

  * Documentation:
    - Document how to select aspell for ispell.el
  * emacsen support (** Important, should pass to sarge **)
    - Make sure aspell uses ispell.el dict encoding,
      not someone taken from the environment (closes: #299725)
     
      The problem here is that aspell 0.60 does the aspell<->pipe
      communication in an encoding selected after the environment, but
      ispell.el expects the encoding declared by the dict. Mostly a problem
      when aspell is run in an utf8 environment, breaking spellckecking with
      aspell from emacs when text contains non 7bit chars.

0.25.4  Accepted [2005-04-11]

  *  Make translatable the manual entry choice in debconf
     template dictionaries-common/languages. (closes: #299541)

     - Fix for this originally l10n bug required changes in some non l10n
       files, so this is not strictly a l10n bugfix. I strongly prefer this
       bugfix passing to sarge, because otherwise the extra debconf prompt
       generated by this bugfix will appear in the sarge-etch transition.
       While this could be hacked in the dictionaries .config files, I
       prefer to not add this so 'ad hoc' code if possible.

  * Fix for non reported bug, was not prompting when the selected dict is
    removed and there are still two possible options left.
 
  * Make sure no symlink creation is attempted when there are no more
    members in a class (ispell dict/wordlist)

0.25.5  Accepted [2005-04-18]

   * Documentation:
     - Adding missing info to the changelog.

0.25.6  Accepted [2005-04-25]

   * l10n changes:
     -  Romanian (#305892) and Basque (#306048) debconf translations

0.25.7  Accepted [2005-04-26]

   * l10n change: Simplified Chinese debconf translation (#306408).

0.25.8  Accepted [2005-04-27]

   * l10n change: Albanian debconf translation (#306570).

0.25.9  Accepted [2005-04-30]

   * Typo fix (#307030):
     - Removed extra trailing whitespaces in the templates file.
     - Unfuzzied translations for this harmless change.

   * l10n change: Vietnamese debconf translation (#307011).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please let me know if there is something not acceptable for sarge, so I can
branch the package with the accepted items.

Apart from this I noticed that the obsolete 0.22.40sarge7 version of
dictionaries-common is still present in 'Testing Proposed Updates' and in
the mirrors.

Cheers,

-- 
Agustin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: