On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 09:27 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 09:47:40AM -0400, Adam C Powell IV a écrit :
> >
> > why not just adapt the existing doc-base format, adding a new "BibTeX
> > files" field? The description of which citation to use when (canonical
> > article(s) for different parts of the package, background theory,
> > related stuff) can just go in the doc-base abstract.
>
> Hello Adam,
>
> let me rephrase to see if I understood completely.
>
> Let a package "foo", that contains the program "foo" that was published
> by Bar in the Fooomics journal.
>
> The Debian source package would contain a file named
> foo-reference.doc-base in its debian directory. foo-reference.doc-base
> would contain something like this:
>
> Document: foo-reference
> Title: Bibliographic information for foo
> Section: Bibliography
>
> Format: BibTeX
> @book{foo-debian,
> title = "Foo for the masses",
> author = "Bar",
> publisher = "Foomics journal",
> year = "2029"
> doi = 3.14159/foo_article
> }
>
> Users would first have to go to /usr/shar/doc-base by themselves, then some
> time later we would update doc-base to generate something from the Format:
> BibTeX entry, and in a third step we would implement a central bibliography
> that can be easily used by reference managers and LaTeX articles.
>
> Does it reflect your proposition ?
That's pretty much it, though I figured it would point to one or more
separate .bib files instead of having the entry inside the doc-base
file. It seems like it has the best of both worlds: use current files
and infrastructure, but allow expansion to a centralized citation list
as soon as squeeze.
What do you think?
-Adam
--
GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6
Engineering consulting with open source tools
http://www.opennovation.com/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part