[Pkg-ime-devel] Bug#873860: Anthy library breakage

[NIIBE Yutaka]

Osamu Aoki <osamu at debian.org> wrote:
> If what NOKUBI Takatsugu's comment is correct, I wonder why anthy is
> upgraded without coordinating with key users:
>  ibus
>  uim
>  fcitx
>
> (Please note these have many dependence packages so the testing
> migration is slow if package version dependency is correctly recorded.)

I'm sorry.  It was me who upload the anthy package for Sid.  Apparently,
I was conscious of the impact when I was uploading it for experimental
in 2015.  In August 2017, I forgot this issue when I was asked uploading
new Anthy for Debian.  I had thought as if it's only anthy's own problem.

The original plan in 2010 was doing the migration in Debian around 2010.
It didn't occur because of our human resources (and troubles).  What we
did in 2010 was: We made a team as pkg-anthy on Alioth and revived
upstream development to collect patches floating around and to merge.
Then, in 2015, I uploaded it in experimental.

> I agree moving to utf8 is right thing to do but this breakage is
> something we should avoid.

Yes.

> If -dev package version is bumped, we can have slow migration without
> breaking packages depending on old anthy.  But if we share the same -dev
> package name, all related package needs to be uploaded together
> (otherwise we suffer long broken sid system).

Thanks.  Now, I understand (I didn't know that fully).  I should have
learned before uploading to Sid.

> But if library change its API spec from non-utf8 to utf8, this needs to
> be coordinated carefully.

I learned.

> It's not simple. What does people think is the right way to fix.

I have been using Anthy since its birth, but I only use through Emacs
with egg.  Even if I don't use, I should be careful when I touch Debian
package.

Today, the Emacs module egg requires total rewrite for Emacs 25, due to
the change of Emacs (display property thing).  I was considering making
a loadable module for Emacs for Anthy.  That was another pressure.


Any suggestions are welcome.  It seems for me that it would be better
to change the -dev package name.
--