Hi All, I didn't notice the version numbers. Those Source locations indicate the community repository directly. If we change the arhive names, users cannot download the archive files directly, can they?
Probably I think this is a first time that community does not have the version number in the source filenames. The following is the top page to download .zip files(webcache.uk may be needed for the proxy). http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Dictionaries Community notes the modified date in the web page only. Basically I think repackaging is a bad idea to maintain the spec. My suggestion is to just rename the .zip files. # mv fr_FR.zip fr_FR-2002-06-08.zip SourceN: http://foo/../fr_FR-2002-06-08.zip What do you think? fujiwara Yuriy Kuznetsov wrote: > Dermot, > > Dermot McCluskey wrote: > >> Yuriy, >> >>> Sorces of dictionaries were taken from community and their locations >>> are correct in Source section of SUNWmyspell-dictionary.spec on the >>> moment of creation of SUNWmyspell-dictionary-* pkgs. >> >> >> >> So my question is, are these external files likely to be overwritten >> by their communities, so that, for example, we could not >> reproduce a specific historical build because only the new >> source tarballs are now available? > > We thought it would be a good idea to keep names as they are in community. > >> >> Will you be putting copies of these tarballs in the internal >> tarball repository (I don't see them there currently)? > > Yes. > >> Maybe you could unzip and rezip them with a version when doing so? > > We probably can do this way. > Fujiwara, what do you think about this issue ? > >> >> >> Also, copyright year (and owner?) in the header seem incorrect. > > Made correction(file attached). > > Thanks, > yuriy > >> >> >> - Dermot >> >
