Bug#555707: Please provide an additional package
andreas at fam-tille.de
Wed Nov 11 18:08:21 UTC 2009
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 05:25:55PM +0300, Dmitry E. Oboukhov wrote:
> AT> Thanks for the patch.
> If You agree to apply the patch, I'll make some changes in it (I want
> to drop out arrows from target dictionaries)
I surely agree if it makes sense.
> goldendict can use dict-wn package, but dict-wn look worse than
> wordnet-goldendict, because this script was specially written to get
> the nicest form.
Ahh, OK. Perhaps it might make sense to verify how wordnet-goldendict
might look in text interface. It might make sense to give a nicely
formatted UI preference and live with the not so beautiful but prefectly
readable console output.
> I don't know how is dict-wn dictionary looked in other programs, but
> dict-* utilities (if i'm not wrong) are oriented to use in terminals,
> so their dictionaries look worse in GUI-program.
Thanks for the clarification.
> dict-wn CAN be used, but wordnet-goldendict has more nice form.
> Compare screenshots in attache:
> ss-dict-wn.png and ss-wordnet-goldendict.png
> the first is oriented to use in terminal, the second is oriented to
> use in GUI.
The screenshots are enlighting, thanks. How does a dict terminal would
look like with wordnet-goldendict?
> PS: I'm asked by a few people to add this variant into debian, but i
> think that it is a bad way to add another source with the same data.
I perfectly agree. My goal is to present WordNet database in the best
possible way. So I definitely agree to enhancements. Duplicating the
source makes no sense at all.
> It would be nice and true if we could add this patch to Your package.
Sure. No problem. I just wanted to make sure I have understood the
rationale and we will not find an alternate way with nearly the same
> yes, this script is quite slowly, but rebuildings do not often do, i
> think that it isn't big problem ;)
Well, the extra Ruby build dependency does hurd a bit because at home
(where I do most of my Debian work) I have a terribly slow connection
and updating pbuilder with just another Build-Depends is not really
funny. But upstream does not change that frequently.
I'm actually a bit concerned about #549768 which might result in some
more complete rebuilds. BTW, on which architecture did you builded the
package. Did you aboserved any problem.
According to the timing. I will have only 128kBit upload which
frequently breaks upload of larger packages like WordNet. So I
can not upload your patch before Monday. Please ping me if you
did not heard anything from me until Wednesday next week.
Kind regards and thanks for the patch
More information about the debian-science-maintainers