Re: XS-X-Vcs-XXX field not (yet) announced
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 21:43:37 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 02:21:22PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
>> I would also like to raise a question: does it make any sense to be
>> able to list two URLs, one for the Debian branch and one for the
>> upstream branch?
> I've thought about similar issues. I made up my mind about these
> questions being in the wrong direction :)
> My idea for this field it to give a pointer intended for human
> consumption. Once a user knows where to look, if he is willing to
> have access to the repo he is probably able to discover branches,
> tags, learn the repo layout and so on. If we agree on this idea I
> would answer no, it doesn't make sense to me.
> Alternatively we can try to fully encode in the field(s) all the
> semantic information that might be needed to perform several tasks:
> automatic downloading of the appropriate branch matching a given
> debian release, spotting the tags matching given versions,
> whatever. I really think this is a dangerous slope, we will probably
> be swamped in the details of the VCS we consider.
> XS-Vcs-XXX was in my mind a one-size-does-fit-all solution, assuming
> the target of the information is a human. YMMV.
Seems to me that this is fit for centralized single branch
repositories only -- at least, I fail to see how I can represent my
mlti-branch (no yet multi-repository) configs that need at least 3
different branches from three different categories to pull together
my Debian packages.
If this is a SVN only thing, then you could get awau with
calling ti XS-SVN field.
The truth about a man lies first and foremost in what he hides. Andre
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C