Re: You can now check BibTeX file obtained from debian/upstream files
On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 09:40:09AM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
>
> > I could imagine several ways to answer this question (my prefered way
> > would be to use UDD). Doing this based on the information in the BibTeX
> > file is IMHO a misuse of the BibTeX database: BibTeX was invented to
> > manage citations for LaTeX texts - it was not invented to obtain
> > information about Debian packages.
>
> hm... [cut my previous, ironic version of the reply]
> wasn't it "invented" to cite the software provided by Debian packaging?
No. The BibTeX-*Format* existed before Debian. The debian.bib file as
it is provided currently was rather a proof of principle that we can
turn a part of the packaging information into a BibTeX file. The
current way to deliver it is suboptimal and weak - we need to stabilise
this according to some common agreement.
> if so, association with the packages is imho quite relevant there then
I agree that it is relevant, but I'm just hesitating to add a field which
is not mentioned in the BibTeX specification. As far as I understood you
you do not really want to use the field in a printed documentation
bibliography and I would like to use the *.bib file exclusively there
because we have better means to access structured data rather than via
the BibTeX detour.
> > So while it would be pretty simple to add the field you were asking for
> > to the BibTeX file you need better arguments to convince me to do
> > something that could be done with a pretty simple UDD query way more
> > reliably.
>
> users + UDD == confusion
That's a bit polemic, IMHO. You can create a pretty simple interfaces
to UDD.
All I wrote above modulo I did not terribly missunderstood your intended
usage - so if my text sounds pretty insane please explain better what
purpose a package field should serve (specifically what to do in the
case of multibinaries).
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: