[Pkg-crosswire-devel] libsword6 and libsword7 in peaceful coexistence... only if we separate out the utilities

[Jonathan Marsden]

Matthew Talbert wrote:

> The module development tools are used only by module developers and
> they should *not* be using old versions.

OK, thanks for confirming that.

> In fact, I think right now the versions provided by sword-1.5.11
> aren't really recommended (yes, there needs to be a new release).

We can only work with what upstream provides.  I'm very reluctant to get
into packaging from their svn, it's just ugly to have to do that kind of
thing.  Especially if when exactly they change the ABI/API is unclear!

> installmgr, diatheke, and mkfastmod would probably all qualify as
> end-user tools, but all of the functionality in them is superseded by
> the front-ends. These tools also change very little from version to
> version.

OK, nice.  On that basis, I'd like to propose that we should:

(a) create a new binary package called libsword-tools with the
module-developer tools in it;

(b) move the installmgr and mkfastmod end-user tools into the diatheke
package.

This would make libsword7 and libsword6 able to coexist, and it seems
like a pretty clean and logical way to split the tools up, to me.

Any objections... or any alternative suggestions, from anyone?

Jonathan