Hi Bernhard,
Bernhard R. Link wrote:
>> + In the case of Git, the value consists of a URL, optionally
>> + followed by the word <tt>-b</tt> and the name of a branch in
>> + the indicated repository, following the syntax of the
>> + <tt>git clone</tt> command. If no branch is specified, the
>> + packaging should be on the default branch.
>> + </p>
>
> Why only document git and not the syntax of the other fields?
Thanks.
My excuse is that a syntax allowing Vcs-Git to refer to a particular
branch was considered a blocker for documenting the Vcs-* fields at
all.
Would you be broken-hearted if I asked you to file a new bug for the
other VCSs that also have weird syntaxes worth documenting?
[...]
> I think it might also make sense to explicitly request that the fields should
> describe an anonymous checkout.
Yeah, good catch --- the current text that tries to do that is
only the rationale, and it's better to say it somewhere normative.
How about this?
diff --git i/policy.sgml w/policy.sgml
index 7d514921..58bde0bb 100644
--- i/policy.sgml
+++ w/policy.sgml
@@ -3766,8 +3766,9 @@ Checksums-Sha256:
<p>
The field name identifies the VCS. The field's value uses the
version control system's conventional syntax for describing
- repository locations and should be sufficient to locate the
- repository used for packaging. Ideally, it also locates the
+ repository locations and should be sufficient to locate a
+ publicly accessible repository used for packaging.
+ Ideally, it also locates the
branch used for development of new versions of the Debian
package.
</p>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120716061224.GA5455@burratino
