Re: Asking for common wisdom on new field(s): References*

[Yaroslav Halchenko <debian@onerussian.com>]

btw...

have you ran across pybtex -- it has its "own" yaml format handler (if I
read it right cant import/export to .bib):
http://pybtex.sourceforge.net/features.html
which might become your native choice for upstream-metadata.yaml ?

On Fri, 10 Dec 2010, Charles Plessy wrote:

> Le Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:48:12AM +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :

> > >  - For the Blends task files, I will remove bibliographic information after it
> > >    is transferred to the UDD and the web sentinel generators are adapted to
> > >    this.

> > Just to make sure I understand you correctly:  You will try to collect
> > the bibliographic information from Yaroslav's proposed BibTeX files into
> > UDD?  This is fine for me as well - just asking because your intention
> > is not fully clear.

> Hi Andreas,

> I will add a debian/ustream-metadata.yaml files to the packages for which
> I remove the bibliographic info from the tasks pages.

> The BibTex files may contain more than one reference, and it is not possible to
> know which one to put forward. Unless of course we make a convention that the first
> one is always the recommended one.

> In that case, we could think about gathering the information directly from
> debian/references instead. The main obstacle would be to write the code.
> Ideally, I would hope to find a Perl module like BibTeX::Parser, but that
> accepts a variable or an URL instead of a filehandle.

> Have a nice day,

> Cheers,
-- 
=------------------------------------------------------------------=
Keep in touch                                     www.onerussian.com
Yaroslav Halchenko                 www.ohloh.net/accounts/yarikoptic