Re: Taking over different packages with a single source package

[Justin Pryzby <justinpryzby@users.sourceforge.net>]

On Sat, Dec 24, 2005 at 12:14:06AM +0100, Danai SAE-HAN wrote:
> 
> Hi list!
> 
> I'm nearly finished with my /magnum opus/, latex-cjk (a LaTeX macro
> that allows you to insert Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Thai and
> Vietnamese text in a LaTeX document), which you can find at
> 
>   deb http://chinese.alioth.debian.org latex-cjk/
>   deb-src http://chinese.alioth.debian.org latex-cjk/
> 
> I only need to (re)package some bitmap fonts (which is not necessary
> to run the packages since I also provide better-quality Type1 fonts,
> but is nice to have, esp. for CNS).
> These fonts can be found at ftp://ctan.tug.org/tex-archive/fonts/CJK/.

> I find it too bothersome and clumsy to have a source package for each
> and every font, so I would like to use only 1.
How many source packages are we talking?  Typically, using pristine
source tarballs, when possible, is strongly recommended.  I can see
the justification in repacking to a single sourceball if there are
many such packages.

> My questions: 
>  - What to do about the old changelogs if I want to use a single
>    Debian source for all packages?
Are they all the same?  You might just include them as
changelog.Debian-historical.

>  - Do I just put dummy entries in the changelog up to version 1.0.4?
Anything is probably better than dummy entries:)

>  - Do I put the content of the old changelogs altogether in one
>    changelog entry?
Why?

>  - What about the name of the Debian source packages ("hbf-cns40-1",
>    "hbf-jfs56", etc. in comparison with the new source package
>    "hbf-fonts")?
What about it?

>  - Should I put the old packages on the "Replace:" line?  Or even set
>    "Conflicts: hbf-foo1 (<=1.0.3), hbf-foo2 (<=1.0.2), etc."?
Best to get in touch with Anthony Fok so you can coordinate it.  If
you're going to do separate and pristine source packages, then why not
just use his?

HAPPY WINTER

-- 
Clear skies,
Justin