Re: Status bibref gatherer (Was: Tasks pages (close to) fixed; Bibref does not seem to be updated automatically)
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 04:02:18PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 03:55:42PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > The names in packages-metadata should be source package names, and I have
> > improperly used binary package names when parsing the blends task files.
> >
> > One more item to add the TODO list...
>
> I found another instance (besides probably several R packages): The
> binary package has bibliographic information but the source is named
> ball. Do you consider the switch from binary packages to source
> packages a hard to do change? Do you want me to have a look (if yes,
> some hints might be helpful).
What if you want to have different publication data for different binary
packages, or exclude some binary packages from publication data?
Point in case would be openbabel, where the python bindings had a
dedicated publication, or possibly some libfoo-dev packages in a
development tasks, for which the main publication data might not be very
useful or applicable.
Michael
Reply to: