Hi, Am Dienstag, den 29.11.2011, 09:58 +1100 schrieb Erik de Castro Lopo: > The cons: > > a) It would require a separate hoogle-data source package. you can use dpkg’ multi-upstream-tarball feature to have only one source package. Or put it in debian/; with 3.0 (quilt) this is no problem for binary data any more. > b) I have to figure out a way to retrieve the data. Currently the hoogle > executable, grabs some text files and tarballs and then processes > them and sticks then in /var/lib/hoogle/hoogle-X.Y.Z (if we do a > hoogle-data package then this should be /usr/share/hoogle/hoogle-X.Y.Z). True. But solvable, I think. > There are a bunch of copy right issues about this data, mainly that > if currently doesn't have copyright, other than that it was extracted > from code that is licensed BSD3 or LGPL or MIT etc etc. Given that it does not contain code, but rather is a database, for which different copyright laws apply, I hope (and expect) that this is not a problem. > c) What happens when the local admin adds to the database and then > upgrades the hoogle package? This is usually mean the new package > breaks functionality of the old package. Neil Mitchell tells me > that the database format changes much less often than he does new > releases. Ideally, it’d work like ghc-pkg, where there is a dpkg-managed global data base that is not touched by the user, and a user-managed local database in a separate directory/file, and hoogle merges them at runtime. Is that feasible? Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner mail@joachim-breitner.de | nomeata@debian.org | GPG: 0x4743206C xmpp: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://www.joachim-breitner.de/ -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part