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

Re: DEP5: X-Autobuild

Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> writes:
> * Charles Plessy (plessy@debian.org) [100913 16:25]:
>> > Is this a good way of doing that? The referred-to e-mail says that an
>> > XS-Autobuild header in the debian/control (not copyright) file is
>> > required. Is there a need for a particular header for this in
>> > debian/copyright? Would not the Disclaimer field be sufficient?
>> > 
>> > I propose to remove the entire paragraph. If the consensus is against
>> > that, I propose we rename the field to Non-Free-Autobuild instead of
>> > using an X- prefix.
>>  - describe the fact that the package is autobuildable in debian/copyright,
>> X-Autobuild was a poor choice. My current opinion is that, unless there
>> is an interest to parse a specific field, it it better to use existing
>> ones, in that case Comment or Disclaimer.
> We need both, the mail plus the field.

This is only about the field in debian/copyright, not about the field in
debian/control. We don't need the former, only the latter.

BOFH #332:
suboptimal routing experience

Attachment: pgpI5Dh3V7NHR.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: