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

Re: Lets talk about debian/upstream/edam (Was: r18733 - in trunk/packages/bowtie/tags: . 1.1.1-2/debian 1.1.1-2/debian/upstream)

Hi Andreas & all,

(Ccing Jon Ison from Elixir-DK)

On 02/03/2015 01:55 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:

Hi,

the recent adding of debian/upstream/edam files without any announcement
seems to create some confusion:

On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 02:33:12AM +0000, Charles Plessy wrote:

Author: plessy
Date: 2015-02-03 02:33:11 +0000 (Tue, 03 Feb 2015)
New Revision: 18733

Added:
    trunk/packages/bowtie/tags/1.1.1-2/
    trunk/packages/bowtie/tags/1.1.1-2/debian/changelog
    trunk/packages/bowtie/tags/1.1.1-2/debian/upstream/metadata
Removed:
    trunk/packages/bowtie/tags/1.1.1-2/debian/changelog
    trunk/packages/bowtie/tags/1.1.1-2/debian/upstream/edam
    trunk/packages/bowtie/tags/1.1.1-2/debian/upstream/metadata
Log:
[svn-buildpackage] Tagging bowtie 1.1.1-2


Charles had removed the file which was recently added at the sprint - I
guess because he was not aware about its nature.  I think before those
files will be added we should talk about it and send a short
introduction to the list.
I completely agree with you, and I am sorry if any of my actions actually disturbed the work of debian team members. 



Hervé, Steffen, would you be so kind to do this?
I would suggest that I write a draft for such an introduction, then validate it with Andreas, Steffen and Jon Ison before to send it. What about it? 



BTW, when realising that you are not using UDD[1] (at least I guess so
from the fact that there is no hit in

    $ grep -Ri udd trunk/community/edam

) and when also noticing that you fetched some metadata in

    trunk/community/edam/test/test_muscle/debian

which is completely available in UDD you most probably are suffering
from an unfortunate design for the problem you want to solve.  I admit
I'm coming up a bit late with this since the Sprint is over but I have
realised this right now.  We should have definitely talked about the
usage of UDD which contains *all* machine readable metadate about our
packages in a very easily accessible form.
If UDD contains all the metadata, then yes, I'm all in favor of this! I really like parsing files, but if there is already a unified source for this, I'll have a look into it. Should we discuss this in the "introduction" thread? 

Cheers,
Hervé



Kind regards

        Andreas.

[1] https://wiki.debian.org/UltimateDebianDatabase
Reply to: