On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 08:15:37AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > while I would welcome this sort of information being captured using debtags, > this would not help me if I wanted to tell apt which packages are okay for me > and which ones are not because apt cannot set pin priorities according to a > package's debtags, right? Right, but you need to start encoding the information in a machine parsable way somewhere. Once you've that, you can exploit the information, not before. > Also, can the reason why something is in non-free not be captured by > increased and a more structured use of DEP-5 (machine-readable > debian/copyright)? Policy §12.5 already requires to explain why a package is in non-free: Packages in the contrib or non-free archive areas should state in the copyright file that the package is not part of the Debian distribution and briefly explain why. and DEP-5 prescribes the Disclaimer field to that end. Unfortunately, no further (machine-readable) structure *within* the content of that field is prescribed by DEP-5. So, yes, we will need to improve that part of DEP-5 if we want to exploit information in there. I duly note that, out of the box, having the information in d/copyright won't help with APT pinning either. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Former Debian Project Leader . . . . . @zacchiro . . . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature