Bug#583489: qa.debian.org: Please provide 1.0 (explicit) and 1.0 (implicit) information
On Thu, 27 May 2010, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 27/05/10 at 21:25 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > Package: qa.debian.org
> > Severity: wishlist
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > The graphs on http://upsilon.cc/~zack/stuff/dpkg-v3/ are quite
> > interesting to follow the adoption of source format v3 in the archive.
> > The service is using data from
> > http://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/dpkgformat.cgi ; would it be possible for
> > that data to tell whether it's 1.0 implicitly or 1.0 because of
> > debian/source/format?
>
> No: we use the Sources files as generated by ftpmasters, and that file
> contain Format: 1.0 when no format has been explicitely specified in the
> source package.
> You might want to ask ftpmaster to provide that information in the
> Sources file, but I'm not sure it makes sense.
Cluttering it just for a stat doesn't make sense, no.
You can compute the difference between
http://lintian.debian.org/tags/missing-debian-source-format.html (11811
packages according to http://lintian.debian.org/tags.html) vs 12309 on the
stats page that would give 500 packages that would have selected 1.0 in
debian/source/format but there might be some differences in the package
set covered (non-free included or not, I believe udd includes it while
lintian doesn't).
I had requested a pedantic tag listing package thas put 1.0 in
debian/source/format but Russ Alberry did not want it, it's too soon
according to him.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Like what I do? Sponsor me: http://ouaza.com/wp/2010/01/05/5-years-of-freexian/
My Debian goals: http://ouaza.com/wp/2010/01/09/debian-related-goals-for-2010/
Reply to: