Re: are lsm files worth putting in binary package?

[dark@xs4all.nl (Richard Braakman)]

Joey Hess wrote:
> However, the point of my original posting about this is that I can't find
> any information in lsm files that isn't duplicates in the the Packages file
> and the copyright files. Do you have any examples?

As a data point: I included an lsm file in the hextype package.  After
I read your original post on this subject, I moved the "author"
information into the copyright file and removed the lsm.  (Previously,
the copyright file just said "GPL version 2", without mentioning an
author.)

I think the lsm may have some value, though.  Even if its contents are
duplicated elsewhere, the lsm is a standard format.  Currently the
information in the copyright file is sort of buried.  It can't be
extracted automatically.  I hope that the new source format will fix
this.

Richard Braakman


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .