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

Re: DEP5: Extra fields without ‘X-’ prefix?

On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 11:13:32AM +0000, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
On su, 2010-11-14 at 11:37 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
Le Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 08:12:15PM +0000, Lars Wirzenius a écrit :
> The editorial changes, plus these two items, are the final things > left for DEP5, except for the review for licenses, shortnames and > SPDX compatibility.

Hi Lars,

I would like to discuss about the addition of ‘X-’ in front of extra fields. I proposed earlier to recommend against, Steve answered that he prefered to simply remove the requirement.

I'm fine with pretty much anything with regards to the extra fields. How about we change the wording from this:

Extra fields can be added to any paragraph. Their name starts by **`X-`**.

To this:

Extra fields can be added to any paragraph. No prefixing is necessary. Future versions of the `debian/copyright` specification will attempt to avoid conflicting specifications for widely used extra fields.

Is that enough? This is a minor detail, I'd like to not start specifying too much about how parsers are supposed to handle the fields, etc.

Thanks for raising this issue, Charles!

I find, like Charles, that X- prefixing should be discouraged, and your proposed rephrasing only relaxes the encouragement IMO. I would prefer to either explicitly discourage prefixing or simply drop that "No prefixing is necessary" sentence.

Kind regards, and thanks for your tremendous patience in this process,

 - Jonas

 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: