Hello, On 2012-05-17 13:48, Michal Suchanek wrote: > Admittedly there is no text in social contract about using > Debian-proprietary formats. And a format only defined by "apt can read > that" is definitely Debian-proprietary there is no better term for that. > > I'd say it's slightly discriminatory against software not part of Debian > that cannot rely on getting notified when "apt can read that" silently > changes, there is no document defining what apt should be able to read > that software authors can rely on to interoperate with apt, one of the > core Debian tools. Apt in turn relies on open standards like HTTP and > FTP to interoperate with the rest of the world.
As someone who had to reverse-engineer APT repository format I fully agree with the above. With one minor addition that some software which is (non-core) part of Debian suffer from the same problem. -- Eugene V. Lyubimkin aka JackYF, JID: jackyf.devel(maildog)gmail.com C++/Perl developer, Debian Developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120517132412.GA23563@r500-debian
