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

Re: Another take on package relationship substvars



Quoting Boyuan Yang (2024-02-22 20:25:32)
> 在 2024-02-22星期四的 19:32 +0100,Niels Thykier写道:
> > I think our package helper tooling should just automatically aggregate 
> > all provided substvars of the format ${*:Depends} and append it the 
> > Depends field. Rinse and repeat for other relationship fields.
> > 
> > The list of fields where this is applied would be curated, so it only 
> > applies to known relationship fields where we feel it makes sense. My 
> > starting list would be:
> > 
> >   * Any dependency field, that is: Pre-Depends, Depends, Recommends, and
> >     Suggests
> > 
> >   * The Provides field.
> > 
> > I am omitting Breaks, Conflicts, and Replaces because I am not aware of 
> > any users of these at the moment. I am open to adding them, if there is 
> > a strong use-case.
> 
> Can we also consider ${*:Built-Using} as typically seen in ${sphinxdoc:Built-Using}?
> This is another field that people keep forget adding. While missing
> this field is not severely harmful, having it automatically handled
> would be beneficial.

...and related to that, also ${*:Static-Built-Using} which is generated
by Rust (and, I seem to recall having read somewhere, Go) tooling.


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
 * Sponsorship: https://ko-fi.com/drjones

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature


Reply to: