Le Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 07:48:21PM +0200, Thorsten Alteholz a écrit : > > I just found out that package abyss is currently not maintained > within Debian Med but still in the svn repository. As there are > currently several methods to mark packages no longer within svn > (MOVED, README_git, now_managed_via_git, > REMOVED_FROM_DEBIAN.readme), I would like to restart a previous > discussion and propose a machine readable README.status file. > It should contain at least a Status:- and a Comment:-line. In case > of an abandoned package there might be also a Reason:- and maybe an > URL:-line. If the package is finally deleted from svn, a Revision: > might be added. > > For now the following values come into my mind: > Status: abandoned <- no longer maintained in svn repository > Reason: external <- external maintainer > Reason: git <- package is now in git repository > URL: xxx <- new URL for that package > Reason: removed <- package removed from Debian > Status: active <- this package is maintained in svn > Revision: 1234 <- Revision of svn delete command (in case someone > want to have a look at this old stuff) > Comment: xxxx <- lots of interesting stuff about the package, > this should be the last entry
Hi Thorsten, this is a very good idea. I sometimes use a debian/DRAFT file in the draft packages I upload, but would be happy to use debian/README.status instead. Here are a couple of suggestions. - Use YAML as a syntax. There are parsers for many languages, that are very easy to use. - Do not require fields to be in a particular order, as it is not the case in Debian control files, YAML, email headers, or other pre-existing syntaxes that could be used for README.status. - I find the Status field redundant with the other fields. For instance: Status: moved URL: git://somewhere.example.com/foo.git Could be simplified in: Moved: git://somewhere.example.com/foo.git or: Status: draft Comment: feel free to take over and upload to NEW. could be simplified in: Draft: feel free to take over and upload to NEW. Also, a Format field might be useful in case README.status has so much success that a backwards-incompatible version 2.0 is needed to extend it :) Perhaps you can have a look at my “UMEGAYA”, UPstream MEtadata GAthered with YAml project, which I unfortunately neglected recently for expriments on the Amazon computer cloud and DEP 5. http://upstream-metadata.debian.net/ Cheers, Charles -- Charles Plessy Debian Med packaging team, http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
