Damyan Ivanov wrote: > -=| Bernd Zeimetz, Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 01:09:04PM +0100 |=- >> as we have three packages now which provide /usr/bin/markdown it >> could make >> sense to use alternatives here, although I didn't check if the three >> implementations are compatible enough. At least this would be a better >> solution >> than what the perl module does now - conflicting against the markdown >> package. >> Probably people want to be able to use both versions? >> >> Any opinions on that? > > Nt really an oppinion, rather just some data: > > The contents of 'markdown' and 'libtext-markdown-perl' look very > similar: > [...] > > Reading their copyright files, it seems like libtext-markdown-perl is > a fork of John Gruber's markdown, which seems like not much maintained > upstream (last release in 2004).
Is there a reason why markdown should be kept in the archive then? Migrating to to libtext-markdown-perl sounds like the best idea. I'm CCing the RFA bug for markdown to let people know about that. We could make markdown a package which depends on libtext-markdown-perl | python-markdown to migrate to an uptodate version and handle /usr/bin/markdown by alternatives. The other option would be to drop /usr/bin/markdown from the python package, I don't have a proper opinion on that the best thing is yet. -- Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.de http://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprints: 06C8 C9A2 EAAD E37E 5B2C BE93 067A AD04 C93B FF79 ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
