On 03.10.2018 11:17 Andreas Beckmann wrote: > Rather pdftk-java should take over the pdftk binary package, s.t. there > is an upgrade path. (A Provides: pdftk does not create an upgrade path). > That should make the old pdftk source package go away ...
My plan for the upgrade path was to release pdftk 2.02-3 as an transition package that depends on pdftk-java. Currently, pdftk-java is the only working alternative, but maybe upstream or someone else finds another way to solve the GCJ issue... >From my perspective, providing the pdftk binary package in pdftk-java seems to be a bit misleading, since the upstream is different. (The pdftk binary itself is currently provided by update-alternatives in pdftk-java) What do you think, Andreas? Best wishes, Johann Felix -- Johann Felix Soden, joh...@debian.org, DD
