If you checkout UDD code from Git[1] you could do
./update-and-run.sh blends-prospective
In this process the set of metadata is unpacked on
your machine and you can see by the following command:
grep -e Registration -e Donation /srv/udd.debian.org/mirrors/machine-readable/*/*.upstream
several upstream metadata files do just contain the Registration and
Donation information.
How to proceed with the upstream metadata in your case: Probably you
need to create a new table for the metadata and probably it makes sense
to accept all keys declared at the Wiki page that defines this file[5].
I'm a bit uncertain whether it is a good idea to keep the references in
a separate table. While I tend to say that we leave it as is and keep
only the other fields in a separate table it somehow conflicts with the
logic to have one store for one type of data. On the other hand we
have some applications that rely on the separate bibref table and this
comes quite handy. What do you think about this?
[1] ssh://git.debian.org/git/collab-qa/udd.git
[5] https://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamMetadata
BTW, when looking at the code I noticed that the change I recently did
in the references definition:
https://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamMetadata?action="">
also needs to be implemented in the bibref importer. I also realised
that while ISSN is implemented for UDD it was lacking on the
specification page. I just fixed this with the latest change in the
Wiki.
BTW, since it is also related to our GSoC work: Could you perhaps make
up your mind about
https://lists.debian.org/debian-blends/2015/04/msg00038.html
(and my answer to this)?
I did not found the time to check this and I think it would be a great
exercise for you to warm up with the tasks pages.