Quoting Pander (2018-07-07 13:15:26) > Thanks, but that was not the assumption, rather the assumption that > myspell-xx and hunspell-xx are offering the same content. And Hunspell > succeeded MySpell. Based on that, that the hunspell package is the > newer or more up to date.
Hunspell _format_ succeeded Myspell, but _dictionaries_ exist using either format. It is wrong to assume that an american english disctionary is more up to date than a british english dictionary, based on the lingual _regions_ being of different age. > The situation now is, that there is "myspell-xx-author1" and > "hunspell-xx-authorA". Similar case would be that "python-numpy" and > "python3-numpy" are assumed to be by the same author and offer the > same functionality. The comparable situation is if one upstream project provides numpy only for Python 3.x, and another(!) upstream project provides numby only for Python 2.x. that is technically possible, but less likely than for one dictionary to be offered in myspell format and another offered in hunspell format. > A mistake that could be made less often with perhaps other package > names (-dsdo), especially by non-advanced users. But I leave it at > what it is, wontfix. Thanks for your feedback. It would indeed make good sense for the packages to be distinguishable by suffix, when originating from different upstream sources. What would make more sense to me, however, is that the newer dictionary from different upstream source (and with weaker coverage) was renamed, rather than the older well-established one. If you agree, then please reasign to hunspell-da. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
