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

[DEP5] Asking for common wisdom on new field(s): References*



Dear DEP5 Committee ;)

In the light of previous discussions [1] and the presentation of our little
effort at debconf10 [2, 3 for PDF], and now following your recommendation
I am RFCing for References* fields to be used in DEP5-formatted copyright
files.  I foresee use of following fields:

References:
  free-form paragraph describing the references [e.g. 4]

References-<format>:
  where format is the bibliography format commonly used. In our case we
  use Bib, so it would be References-bib: containing verbatim bib entries [e.g.
  5]

  This is to enable simple (tools such as (WiP) dbib-collect [7]) to
  present a user with a ready-to-use .bib file for the software they use
  on their systems

If you wonder why we want to use debian/copyright for including references:

1. This is the file users consult to discover
  - who is the author of the software
  - under what terms to use
  - where to obtain the sources
  So, naturally, it also fits
  - how could I refer/cite it
  Even more, for the attribution licenses, if attribution
  suggests referencing, that seems to be the ultimate location to
  provide such a reference (not to mention non-free licenses requiring
  referencing)
2. This is the file available in extracted form from
  http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/
  which allows for an easy way to extract references and to include
  them into package description pages (similar to what blends task
  pages do [e.g. 6]).
3. This is the file available on the user system in canonical location

So, your comments are more than welcome (so I could start pruning X- in some
copyright files where we already initiated this approach)

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2008/10/msg00033.html
[2] http://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2010/debconf10/low/1313_1313_New_developments_in_Science_Packaging.ogv
    http://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2010/debconf10/high/1313_1313_New_developments_in_Science_Packaging.ogv
[3] http://neuro.debian.net/_files/s-bib.pdf
[4] http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-exppsy/brian.git;a=blob;f=debian/copyright;hb=HEAD#l5
[5] http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-exppsy/haxby2001.git;a=blob;f=debian/copyright;hb=HEAD#l5
[6] http://debian-med.alioth.debian.org/tasks/imaging
[7] http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-exppsy/debian-bibliography.git;a=blob;f=tools/dbib_collect;hb=HEAD

On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Philip Hands wrote:
> >         +to standard ones so that mistakes are easier to catch. 
> >         +Future versions of the `debian/copyright`
> >         +specification will attempt to avoid conflicting specifications
> >         +for widely used extra fields.
> It occurred to me before that this should also suggest that people ask
> around before making up new names, but I thought that should probably go
> without saying -- both that and this wording both read a little like
> "don't be stupid" to me.
-- 
=------------------------------------------------------------------=
Keep in touch                                     www.onerussian.com
Yaroslav Halchenko                 www.ohloh.net/accounts/yarikoptic

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: