> The package seems in good shape, except for the "inih" one-file library. > It's under a different license, thus it needs a separate entry in > debian/copyright. Also, as it's already packaged in Debian, it might > be better to use that copy rather than what's in tree.
Hello! Thank you for checking the package and for pointing this out. Unfortunately, it seems that the upstream `inih` is not compatible with the editor anymore -- the internal copy is either historical or modified, and relies on slightly different library API. Fixing the incompatibility requires larger path than what would be maintainable. I have contacted upstream author about whether there's some serious reason for keeping the bundled version; I'll modify the package accordingly (either changing license or unbundling the library) when I get the info. :]
