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

Re: New field in binary stanza

On Mon, Dec 24, 2007 at 04:51:13PM +0100, David Paleino wrote:
> would it be possible to have a "License" field in the information of a package?

I understand your need, but in this case (as opposed to the others you
mention) I believe a new field is not the right solution. The reason is
that in the general case too many information would need to be encoded
in such a field; that's why a machine interpretable copyright format has
been proposed [1].

To avoid bloating the Sources (see other replies) the only possible way
in between would be to have such a field only for "simple cases" (e.g.
GPL-only packages). But I'm way in favour of no information over partial

Maybe the related question is: once the debian/copyright format is
widespread enough, how can we make such an information available
archive-wide mechanically?

[1] http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat

Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what?
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/
(15:56:48)  Zack: e la demo dema ?    /\    All one has to do is hit the
(15:57:15)  Bac: no, la demo scema    \/    right keys at the right time

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: