-=| Bernd Zeimetz, Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 10:50:28PM +0100 |=- > Is there a reason why markdown should be kept in the archive then?
I think no. But the package is still listed as maintained as Matt
Kraai. Matt, do you mind the proposed removal of the markdown package
in favour of libtest-markdown-perl and python-markdown?
> 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.
Do I understand your suggestion correctly? You propose that
libtext-markdown-perl adds a transitional 'markdown' binary package
which depends on libtext-markdown-perl | python-markdown. Additionaly,
'libtext-markdown-perl' and 'python-markdown' should conflict/replace
'markdown (<< 1.0.26-2~)', right? (assuming 1.0.26-2 is the version
introducing the 'markdown' binary package').
About alternatives, if we define "the markdown interface" to be
markdown input > output
then both implementations seem to support it and alternatives are
appropriate.
(Note that starting libt-m-p's markdown without arguments waits for
input from STDIN (an can be used as 'markdown < input'), while p-m's
markdown shows usage information. Not sure if this is an
incompatibility that needs addressing)
Now we 'only' have to decide about priorities :)
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
