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

Re: Bug#555743: dpkg-gencontrol: add support for Description:-s in the Source package stanza

Hello everybody,

Le Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 02:04:56PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> On Tue, 02 Mar 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 01:03:57PM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> > > The substvars approach sounds good to me. I think I'd use it quite a lot,
> > > specially in libraries.
> > 
> > That, however, does not solve the problem of how to access a source
> > package description from infrastructure tools such as DDPO, the PTS,
> > etc.

Moreover, debhelper does not check debian/substvars (at least it did not a
couple of monthes ago), but debian/<binary-package-names>.substvars, so the
source description would have to be in an unexpected place (or a bug should be
reported on debhelper).

> The sensible answer is putting this information in the .dsc and thus in
> the Sources files. But it means that the file would get somewhat bigger
> and it might meant again supplementary changes in the infrastructutre if
> people want to see those descriptions translated (but I'm not convinced
> we need translations on Sources, users of those are mostly developers
> contrary to Packages).

In the long term, we could aim at separating the dpkg meta-data, like the
Source, Package, Architecture, Depends, etc. fields, from the archive
meta-data, like the Vcs-*, DM-Upload-Allowed, Section, Priority, etc. fields.
All the Debian system is aptable anyway, so the Description could be also be
considered archive meta-data without information loss. Unfortunately, this is
perhaps inconvenient for third-party packages.

Have a nice day,

Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan

Reply to: