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

Re: [DEP5] Format of Copyright header



On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 03:05:58PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes:

> > On the other hand, while a "formatted text" field type *may* be reflowed
> > for display, is there any software doing that today wrt DEP5?  Maybe
> > it's enough to rely on the absence of such formatting in DEP5 parsers
> > for the time being; if and when something starts to care about
> > formatting the Copyright field, we can always scan the archive to detect
> > files that look like they'll wind up formatted poorly.

> > And of course, anyone who cares about formatting to this degree can
> > always add that extra space at the front of the line.  I notice, in
> > fact, that all our examples of multi-line Copyright: fields in the draft
> > already do this.

> So the suggestion is to make it formatted text and recommend that the
> whole field be pre-formatted text (indicated by two leading spaces)?

> Hm, yes, that would work and is probably the simplest.

> It occurs to me that an alternative would be to say that line-based lists
> support something akin to RFC 5322 continuation semantics: if a line
> starts with two or more spaces, it's taken as a continuation of the
> previous line.  Then you could do:

> Copyright: 2001 Russ Allbery
>  2004, 2005, 2011
>   The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University

> and have that considered two "lines", one of which has a continuation
> line.  That would preserve the structured semantics, if anyone cares about
> them, at the cost of introducing new syntax to line-based lists that isn't
> supported by the other control fields that use line-based lists (like
> Files or the checksum fields).

It would preserve the capacity for structured semantics, but it would change
the meaning of many files already in the wild.  On that basis, I would like
to avoid making such a change before 1.0 and think that "formatted text" is
the best option here.

Would the attached patch do the job?

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org
=== modified file 'dep5/copyright-format.xml'
--- dep5/copyright-format.xml	2011-12-14 07:46:52 +0000
+++ dep5/copyright-format.xml	2011-12-17 07:04:26 +0000
@@ -486,12 +486,12 @@
     <section id="copyright-field">
       <title><varname>Copyright</varname></title>
       <para>
-        Line-based list: one or more free-form copyright statement(s), one
-        per line.  In the header paragraph, this field gives the copyright
-        information for the package as a whole, which may be different or
-        simplified from a combination of all the per-file copyright
-        information.  In the Files paragraphs, it gives the copyright
-        information that applies to the files matched by the
+        Formatted text, no synopsis: one or more free-form copyright
+        statement(s), one per line.  In the header paragraph, this field
+        gives the copyright information for the package as a whole, which
+        may be different or simplified from a combination of all the
+        per-file copyright information.  In the Files paragraphs, it gives
+        the copyright information that applies to the files matched by the
         <varname>Files</varname> pattern.  If a work has no copyright holder
         (i.e., it is in the public domain), that information should be
         recorded here.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: