Re: "Entry: NA" in debian/upstream/metadata
Dear Matus,
On 2021-03-02 19:56, Matus Kalas wrote:
> I'd suggest hearing from the folks who have done the most of the work
> with manually including those IDs, and letting them approve/decide.
Absolutely!
> I can imagine that for purely practical reasons in the process of the
> manual curation, it might make sense to allow explicitly:
> - Name: OMICtools
> Entry: N/A (Meaning: I have checked and there was no record)
> - Name: bio.tools
> Entry: "" (Meaning: I or someone else should check this out;
> or perhaps: I checked but wasn't conclusive yet)
>
> The latter might be useful for contributors who aren't used to all those
> IDs, to make them more visible (including where the gaps are). But on
> the other hand, if those are well present in an upstream/metadata
> template and very clear in the documentation of upstream/metadata, then
> it is not necessary and I'd then tend to like your suggestion Andrius.
To me, three flavors of "unknown" looks like an overkill. Most of the
metadata in Debian does not even have the two flavors of "unknown":
missing Bug-Submit field in d/u/metadata, Homepage in d/control and
Upstream-Contact in d/copyright means that this piece of information is
either nonexistent or simply not entered (for example, due to the lack
of time). Thus I am not sure whether the added value is worth the
infrastructure/effort here. But again, this is solely my opinion,
certainly not aimed at reflecting those of the people who enter and use
the data in d/u/metadata.
If three flavors option would be preferred, I would also suggest adding
date fields for each entry to signal at which point in time the registry
was inspected.
Best,
Andrius
Reply to: