> The publisher should definitely be able to choose what they wanna sell, and issue new revisions as they see fit.

I agree with the first half of your sentence, but not the second. If an author finalizes their work, then that's it. The publisher can choose to publish or not publish it, but they do not own the copyright on the work, and are not permitted to make modifications and then distribute what can only be considered an unauthorized derived work.

Granted, copyright holders may of course contractually allow publishers to do this. I can only assume this is the case for Dahl's works, as I'd be surprised if a major book publisher did something that would infringe on an author's (estate's) copyright. But I don't think this should be the default, and I'd hope and expect copyright law agrees with me.