Bug#833384: wordnet: multiple packages for the same database

[Ritesh Raj Sarraf]

Source: wordnet
Severity: normal

Hi,

Is there a good reason for having 3 separate packages for the same
wordnet lexical database?

Right now, we have:

wordnet
goldendict-wordnet
dict-wn
dico-module-wordnet


>From a dictionary server point of view, having just one pacakge would
have been nicer. But I can see the argument that may come the other way
around too.

Tools like GoldenDict are nicer that they are able to scan the installed
dictionaries in dict format. This way, it helps the user who could use
the client/server dict interface, as well as the very pretty and useful
goldendict interface.

Is there some way to have it common ? I can see some information loss of
the results from goldendict-wordnet vs dict-wn use case.

The other concerning thing is the multiple copies with different
versions/wordcounts.

dico-module-wordnet is at version 2.2-9. I'm not sure what the db
version is at.

On the rest of the wordnet packages in Debian, you are the maintainer
for all of them. All the packages are at the same version, but their
word counts are slightly different.

For example, as per goldendict dictionaries tab:
goldendict-wordnet      => Total Words: 148730
dict-wn                 => Total Words: 147311


Also, the results of dict-wn vs goldendict-wordnet are slightly
different.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable-debug'), (500, 'unstable'), (101, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 4.6.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_IN.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_IN.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)