[gentoo-dev] Proposal: metadata.xml extensions

[gentoo-dev] Proposal: metadata.xml extensions

[Heinrich Wendel]

Hi,

http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0005.html

comments are welcome.

mfg, Heinrich


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: metadata.xml extensions

[Patrick Kursawe]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 329 bytes --]

On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 11:59:21AM +0200, Heinrich Wendel wrote:
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0005.html
> 
> comments are welcome.

How to handle the situation when a package changes its license and
older versions are distributed unter a different license than newer
versions?

Just wondering,

Patrick	

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: metadata.xml extensions

[Heinrich Wendel]

Am Donnerstag 03 Juli 2003 12:03 schrieb Patrick Kursawe:
> On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 11:59:21AM +0200, Heinrich Wendel wrote:
> > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0005.html
> >
> > comments are welcome.
>
> How to handle the situation when a package changes its license and
> older versions are distributed unter a different license than newer
> versions?
>
> Just wondering,

via the restrict attribute (already in the metadata.xml specification):

The restrict attribute allows to restrict the application of certain tags to 
certain versions of a package. When this attribute is used, a tag without 
this attribute must also exist. That tag without the restrict attribute will 
serve as the default. The format of the restrict attribute is that of the 
DEPEND flag, except that "<" and ">" need to be specified by &lt; and &gt;. 

>
> Patrick
mfg, Heinrich :)


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: metadata.xml extensions

[Michele Balistreri]

I like the idea, i dont think packages change their license so often 
so, we could either:
- Keep the metadata just of the current stable version of the package
or
- Allow to specify multiple license

Personally i think keeping the metadata only of the current stable 
ebuild is the best way, other ebuilds could just contain building-data 
and this would be nice also cause would be clear which is the current 
"adviced" version of certain package (for this porpouse i propose to 
specify the version of the current stable package in the metadata.xml 
file)

Giovedì, 3 Lug 2003, alle 12:03 Europe/Rome, Patrick Kursawe ha scritto:

> On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 11:59:21AM +0200, Heinrich Wendel wrote:
>> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0005.html
>>
>> comments are welcome.
>
> How to handle the situation when a package changes its license and
> older versions are distributed unter a different license than newer
> versions?
>
> Just wondering,
>
> Patrick	
> <mime-attachment>
Michele Balistreri
Gentoo Developer, KDE Team
Rome, Italy


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: Proposal: metadata.xml extensions

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 859 bytes --]

On Thursday 03 July 2003 11:59, Heinrich Wendel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0005.html
>
> comments are welcome.
>
> mfg, Heinrich
>

Hi Heinrich,

As you might know there are some problems with our mailserver being 
blacklisted. For that reason I did not read your mail before now. I have read 
your proposal, and I think it makes sense. I do think though that we might 
want to wait with actually adding such data to the metadata files until 
portage is able to read it.

Of course a delay in implementation does not mean that a decision can not 
allready be made, but I think we can wait a bit until there are more 
comments. Also we might see if there are other desired tags in the metadata 
file.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Researcher
Mail: pauldv@cs.kun.nl
Homepage: http://www.cs.kun.nl/~pauldv

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]