FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.

» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 10-27-2011, 04:01 PM
Matthias Klumpp
Default RFC: Additional metadata in Debian archives (DEP-11)


2011/10/13 Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org>:
>> [...]
>> * *Title: AppStream and Component Metadata for Debian
>> * *DEP: 11
>> * *URL: http://wiki.debian.org/AppStreamDebianProposal
>> * *Drivers: Matthias Klumpp <matthias@tenstral.net>,
>> * * * * * * * *Julian Andres Klode <jak@debian.org>,
>> * * * * * * * *Michael Vogt <mvo@debian.org>
>> * *Abstract:
>> * * Proposal for an additional file in Debian repositories containing
>> * * information about components packages provide as well as
>> * * all data required for the cross-distro application manager
>> * * project AppStream[1].
> I would like to point out that some of this stuff is already placed in
> the Packages files. For example gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg has the custom
> Gstreamer-Decoders header containing a list of codecs this package
> supports.
> I would like to point out this project:
> http://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamMetadata
> And strongly suggest that you make your proposal much more general and
> as such able to handle arbitrary upstream metadata, either manually
> added to debian/control by the Debian package maintainer (like
> UpstreamMetadata) or automatically added to debian/foo/DEBIAN/control
> during the build process by automatic tools (presumably as in your
> proposal).
Yes - this was already planned. The only problem at time is that the
"components" data should be distro-agnostic, so if someone requests
the package providing Plasma-Dataengine with name "XYZ" on Debian, it
should also get an usable result on Fedora etc. with that string.
Also, it would be a bit bad to let maintainers define everything they
want, so maybe we should just allow some custom fields like
The UpstreamMetadata approach looks very nice, but it is about general
upstream info. This is not required dor the components part of DEP-11,
but for the application-related part this information will be
extremely valuable.
So maybe we should really add it.
There was also a proposal to use RDF as the format for DEP-11. If we
add much more metadata, an extensible and standardized format like RDF
would be better, IMO. (If ftpmasters allow it)

> I would also like to see the Packages files split up based on audience:
> dpkg: package names and relationships
> apt: package download information
> all users: description, homepage etc
> desktop users: freedesktop application info, fontconfig (languages
> etc), gstreamer (codec information), mime types, usb ids, pci ids,
> network protocols
> ...
I'd like that, but I don't think this will happen very soon - this
would require a major restructuring of Debian archives, and
incompatible changes, while DEP-11 is just an optional and less
invasive extension


To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: CAKNHny9pAPpqnb4P=zPchojwAp5y6ar5bRcKpfi9YkcH-sTNSQ@mail.gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/CAKNHny9pAPpqnb4P=zPchojwAp5y6ar5bRcKpfi9YkcH-sTNSQ@mail.gmail.com

Thread Tools

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:21 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org