[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: XS-X-Vcs-XXX field not (yet) announced

Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > As to it being an XS- field, dpkg-dev doesn't warn at all about building
> > packages with such a field (unlike an XB- field), so I don't really
> > care, although it seems it would be better to lose the XS- if possible.
> Note that we were more discussing about losing the X- part (for the
> records, a sample field is "XS-X-Vcs-Svn"), which in my mind is the part
> representing the non officialness of the field.
> I don't know at all if it's possible to remove the XS- part. I don't
> really care on the PTS side, but I suspect it wont get in the Sources
> file without the XS- prefix. Am I wrong? Request for help on this ...

The "X" in the XS- part already is intended to mean what your extra X-
is being used to mean, actually. XS- means that the field is unofficial.

To make a Vcs-Svn field work, dpkg-dev needs to be modified to recognise
that field. A simple modification but it would need to be done for all
the other ones for other RCSes, which could be a problem since there are
more and more of them. If we wanted to use a formalised field with no X-
prefix, then something like this might be more scalable:

Vcs: svn svn://...

My preference is either the above or XS-Vcs-*

> > Have you thought at all about automated systems that could be built on
> > top of this? Things like a repo browser that can browse (and find
> > recent changes in) all packages, or mirrors of repos that arn't hosted
> > at svn.debian.org, or what have you.
> I haven't yet thought about going that far, but they are all ideas which
> are whetting my appetite :-)

Another one is sucking them all in to a grand unified tracking repo using
a single RCS (or as many RCSes as everything can be converted to).

see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: