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

Bug#514690: Regarding RFS: Artha



Hi Andreas,
I was wondering if you have uploaded the package to the Debian repository. I apologize if I sound demanding or pestering here :)

I am just curious, how will I know if the upload of the package is done or if the check-in of the control files into the Debian Science SVN is done?

Thanks!

Warm Regards,
   Sundaram


From: Sundaram <legends2k@yahoo.com>
To: Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de>
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 8:31:34 PM
Subject: Re: Regarding RFS: Artha

> Did you checked the attachments to my mail?  Everything is ready there.

Oops! I did see the attachment, but didn't bother to open it, since I thought its what I uploaded in mentors. Forgive my ignorance.
Gee! All the changes are already done, thanks!

> So if I where you I would ask WordNet authors whether they are
> interested to either replace their TclTk code by artha or at least
> add it to the upstream source of their next release.  IMHO artha is
> a nice replacement for wnb.

Okay, I will write to them regarding this. Since Tcl/Tk installation alone takes up around 20 MB, while the actual WordNet is only 10 MB, totalling the WordNet package to 30 (apprx.) Artha would be a decent replacement for just 300 kb (since Glib and GTK will be there defualt in 90% of the *nix operating systems).

Still, am not sure of this though. The reason is that a very few of the options that WNB has are not in Artha. Coordinate Terms, Satillite adjectives and Example frames is the missing list as far as I know, by-heart. The reason for this discrepancy is that I deliberately designed/developed Artha imaging it as a user-friendly thesaurus, while WNB is an illustrator of all the available options of WordNet, by 'all' I mean, those which might not interest the common user too like Sentence Frames for instance: When no example is present for a word, it gives "Something is ----ing" as an example frame where the user could fit in, while this might not be what a thesaurus shows for a light user, hence I removed it. Because of these reasons, I am not sure. Let us see, I will write to Princeton some time.

Now that all the issues in the source package is removed, kindly upload the same :)

Thanks!

Best Regards
    Sundaram Ramaswamy


From: Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de>
To: Sundaram <legends2k@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 8:09:12 PM
Subject: Re: Regarding RFS: Artha

On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Sundaram wrote:
> I haven't used any Python modules or stuff related to Python. I think you are talking about the
> gtk-builder-convert Python tool, that depends on Python interpretor, which in turn is required to
> build Artha's UI files.

Well, if you try to build artha in a pbuilder chroot it is just missing python.

> I have missed it, I will correct it. Likewise, my full name is missing in ChangeLog, will fix it.
>
> I have never used cdbs. Could you point me to some doc. or something so that I can use it? I just
> edited the "rules" file manually from what dh_make gave me. Also if you could send me the other minor
> issues, I can fix them up as well.

Did you checked the attachments to my mail?  Everything is ready there.

> Well, I have no problem in making those changes. Thanks pointing them! I will upload the fixed package
> in a couple of hours to mentors. One of our fellow Debian member (Kartik Mistry) pointed to me that
> mentor only accepts source packages. I never knew this. I was actually creating 2 binary debs for i386
> and AMD64 and uploading them, I think the server has picked up only the last though. So now I needn't
> bother about i386 or AMD64, right? I just need to upload one source package, irrespective of the arch.
> Please correct me if I am wrong.

Yes - a source package has no arch.  The binary package can be builded at
different arches - but this is of no interest for the sponsor because he
will build the package himself.  So there is no need for uploading binary
packages.

> >Would you mind creating a contact between artha and WordNet authors?
>
> In view of adding Artha to their list of "Related Projects" section in WordNet's website, I had sent a
> mail to Princeton Univ. a couple of days ago. But that was just to list Artha in their list of
> projects that use WordNet. As for your idea of including Artha into WordNet, I am completely OK with
> it. By "creating a contact between artha and WordNet authors" what kind of rapport do you mean here? I
> am ready to do what is needful for this, but I am not clear.

A, sorry for my ignorance - you are not only the author of Debian
packaging stuf but also the author of artha code - so you actually
are one of the involved parties. ;-))

So if I where you I would ask WordNet authors whether they are
interested to either replace their TclTk code by artha or at least
add it to the upstream source of their next release.  IMHO artha is
a nice replacement for wnb.

> And yes, today I completed Artha's homepage (http://artha.sourceforge.net/), except the FAQs section.

Great

      Andreas.

-- http://fam-tille.de



Reply to: