Hi Chris, > With the current state of the upstream metadata docs, I was > about to abandon the effort of adding metadata. It's not clear > at all which fields are useful, how a "normal" file looks like, > what it contains, ... > Skimming the wiki gives me the impression its only useful for > academic citations.
We use debian/upstream/metadata in the Perl team to easily obtain the CPAN distribution name and the bug tracker URL, so we can forward patches to CPAN RT or GitHub or mail them to the upstream authors: https://manpages.debian.org/unstable/pkg-perl-tools/dpt-forward.1.en.html When the upstream metadata doesn't exist we try to get that information from other places (i.e. META.*, debian/control, debian/copyright, etc.). For us, having upstream metadata is useful to record that a particular contact method is preferred by upstream. Even though there are only a handful of cases where they prefer to be contacted by mail, those are very important to keep a healthy relationship. Hope this helps, Alex -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Alex Muntada <al...@debian.org> ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ Debian Developer 🍥 log.alexm.org ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
