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

Re: New field in binary stanza

Il giorno Mon, 24 Dec 2007 16:25:43 +0000
Neil Williams <codehelp@debian.org> ha scritto:

> On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 16:51:13 +0100
> David Paleino <d.paleino@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi *,
> > would it be possible to have a "License" field in the information of a
> > package?
> Why? What is the benefit?
> A machine-interpretable format for debian/copyright is already
> available. Why clutter the dpkg and apt-cache with licence lines?

debian/copyright is not available via the APT cache, thus cannot be available
to wrappers like python-apt and others.
> ...
> Some packages can have multiple (compatible) licences - the details of
> what is licenced under which can only be properly determined by reading
> debian/copyright. It's installed for every package so I don't see the
> point.

Again, it's not about _installed_ packages, but about fetching this information
from the APT cache (i.e. can't install packages on Alioth just to read
debian/copyright...), or any other place that won't require root privileges
(debian/copyright is online, but I believe that parsing it might be kind of a
nightmare, if one wants to give a "standardized" output).

I wondered whether one could add a "custom" XS-License field to his packages,
would that be ok? It doesn't really matter if they become "official" (like
Homepage and Vcs-* did), it's just for the matter of parsing the APT cache
(see [1] to understand what I'm trying to achieve).


[1] http://debian-med.alioth.debian.org/tasks/bio.php

 . ''`.  Debian maintainer |  http://snipurl.com/qa_page
 : :'  :  Linuxer #334216  |  http://www.hanskalabs.net/
 `. `'`    GPG: 1392B174   | http://www.debianizzati.org/
   `-   2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: