On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 01:31:27AM +0200, Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > Es geschah am Mittwoch 01 Juni 2005 01:33 als Bill Allombert schrieb: > > 1) Debian Policy mandate the information in the copyright file already: > > > > 12.5. Copyright information > > --------------------------- > > ... > > > > In addition, the copyright file must say where the upstream sources > > (if any) were obtained. It should name the original authors of the > > package and the Debian maintainer(s) who were involved with its > > creation. > > Not sufficient IMO. Again; you need to download and/or install the package to > get that information.
Not true. The copyright files are available on packages.debian.org. > > 2) Developers-reference propose the following: > > > > > > 6.2.4. Upstream home page > > ------------------------- > > > > We recommend that you add the URL for the package's home page to the > > package description in `debian/control'. This information should be > > added at the end of description, using the following format: > > > > . > > Homepage: http://some-project.some-place.org/ > > The 'good' thing about recommendations is that they can be ignored so easily > and in this case this specific recommendation is ignored by the majority of > all Debian packages! What would yours not be ignored even more ? > > The Developers-reference proposal allow a stable user to go to > > package.debian.org to read the description of the unstable version of > > the package and get a more up-to-date information. > > ... where he could also read a "Upstream-Source: " field generated > information... Homepage has the merit to be already implemented. > > 4) Some upstream authors do not want their email address to be exposed. > > To their defense, someone buying the getithere.org domain might be > > surprised to receive spams addressed to the foocrew user. > > Upstream-Source: neglected > or > Upstream-Source: undesired > or even > Upstream-Author: restricted > > or whatever. All those contra arguments depend on a clear minority of packages > and as you can see can still live with my proposal. You failed to identify a single point where Upstream-Source is better than Homepage. > That missing upstream information is really annoying! That is no excuse. Cheers, -- Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
