On Thu, 2019-11-07 at 09:00:29 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Guillem Jover <guil...@debian.org> writes: > > This means that when using a debian/watch file one has to duplicate > > the information in two places, with the possibility of this getting > > out-of-sync, etc. > > > In addition the machine readable debian/copyright format, specifies > > the Source field as optional, which could perhaps be interpreted as > > contradict what policy says. > > > IMO, ideally the requirement in policy would be lifted by clarifying > > that the information should be provided in *either* debian/copyright > > or debian/watch. > > Personally, I usually find they're not the same thing. debian/watch wants > a very specific technical URL (the path to the download location), whereas > I usually use the Source file to specify a higher-level view of the > project. > > That's not an argument against your point that this is duplicative; it's > just that I find Source to more normally duplicate Homepage in > debian/control than duplicate debian/watch.
Hmm, right, that just depends on the upstream project. I guess these tend to converge in the following way: debian/watch → Source: → Homepage: As in you could have the three being distinct, all the same (well the URL in debian/watch being extended by the filename part), or two from each side being equal. > Anyway, I have also found this an odd fit for debian/copyright if one > views debian/copyright as being for the legally-mandated notices plus > license information for Debian package users. I suspect that it's a > combination of that Policy text predating both Homepage and uscan. > > I'm in favor of dropping this information from debian/copyright and > instead writing some language saying that packages should include this > information in Homepage in debian/control and, if there's a substantial > non-obvious difference between the package home page and how to download > it, put download information in debian/watch. I would not even really mind keeping the Source: information (even if we considered debian/copyright not to be the best place, and planned to eventually move it elsewhere), as long as it's different from the other two locations. So I guess the core of the problem I see is that the Source field is always required. Thanks, Guillem
