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

Redundant fields in debian/upstream/metadata and possible lintian check



Hi,

at least in scientific packages the file debian/upstream/metadata is
frequently used since it is the established way to specify citations
belonging to some software..  The definition of the fields is given in
Wiki[1].

These data are gathered in UDD[2].  When I inspected the log of the UDD
importer I noticed that there are a lot of redundant fields like
"Homepage" or "Watch" where we agreed that these fields should not be
duplicated in upstream/metadata.  There are also typos and freely
invented Fields which are not specified on Wiki[1] (like Distributor',
'CRAN', 'Wiki').  I think it makes sense to have some lintian check for
this undefined fields.  I think I'll file a wishlist bug about this
soon.

However, before I do I'd like to discuss the fields Name and Contact.
DEP8 defines[3] the fields Upstream-Name and Upstream-Contact which are
the same values in a file that has a high probability to be properly
maintained.  In the case of r-* packages from CRAN or Bioconductor it
can be even automatically updated (via dh-update-R ... its actually not
really done but I think this could be implemented easily - dh-make-R at
least generates the fields at the time of initial package creation).

I wonder whether we should maintaining duplicated information and thus
would like to hear your opinion about orphaning these fields in
debian/upstream/metadata.

Kind regards

       Andreas.

[1] https://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamMetadata#Fields
[2] https://wiki.debian.org/UltimateDebianDatabase/
[3] https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/

-- 
http://fam-tille.de


Reply to: