Hi,
On 21-04-18 23:51, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Well, that becomes a question of taste. We do need separate binary
> packages anyway, I don't see how using separate source packages makes it
> uglier.
Being one that uploads voices as well, I agree with Samuel on this. Note
though (and I started a
Chris Lamb, le sam. 21 avril 2018 16:28:49 +0100, a ecrit:
> Let me play devil's advocate for a second… Whilst I would agree
> that uploading a package containing all the existing ones for an
> addition might potentially be wasteful of mirror bandwidth, rsync &
> friends would surely be clever eno
Hi Jeremy et al.,
> It might be a bit late to try to change the source packaging for
> all of that.
Oh, I don't know it's ever to late to improve something :)
Let me play devil's advocate for a second… Whilst I would agree
that uploading a package containing all the existing ones for an
additio
On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 4:02 AM, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Secondly, am sorry for not seeing this until these hit NEW. For 100%
> clarity, I've put them "on hold" there for the time being.
Chris, are you aware that there are already about 45 mbrola voices
packages in Debian, even before these new ITPs?
Hello,
Chris Lamb, le sam. 21 avril 2018 09:02:44 +0100, a ecrit:
> Anyway, did you consider using dpkg's support for multiple source
> tarballs?
Yes. The thing is: I don't expect many updates (if any) of the
existing packages: since they basically ship a couple of files in
well-established plac
Hi Samuel,
> There is currently some momentum to make espeak-ng able to use mbrola
> voices. I am thus uploading them to Debian. Here is the list of ITPs:
[snip 30 ITPs]
First, thanks for packaging this :)
Secondly, am sorry for not seeing this until these hit NEW. For 100%
clarity, I've put t
6 matches
Mail list logo
