On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 01:20:14PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> In that case, returning to Mattia's patch, it is probably not correct to
> say that the source Description is relevant for all binary packages,
> because perhaps the substvar is used for some but not all of them?
Mh, we probably we'll need Guillem to confirm/deny this, but here I
really really was trying to not even mention on the substvar thing.
That to me feels like an implementation detail on how to fill a binary
package Description (that can already be accomplished in several other
way).
In my mind I was mostly focusing on being able to provide a
**description for the source package** (that is, then, relevant to
everything that source package builds); said description being picked up
by a substvar and used again later on is more like a nicety that comes
after describing the source first.
Should I perhaps express my intention differently? For example:
|+When used in a source control file in the general paragraph (i.e., the first
|+one, for the source package), the text in this field is used to describe the
|+source package itself, and consequently all of the binary packages
|+built from itself.
?
(fwiw, Guillem: do you think the same text, once picked, should be
copied verbatim on deb-src-control(5)?)
--
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo
GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`.
More about me: https://mapreri.org : :' :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature