On Thu, 07 Nov 2019 09:00:29 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > > 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.
Just as an additional data point: For the average perl package, the URL is the same in all three places (Homepage in d/control, Source in d/copyright, and d/watch).  Not a big deal, especially since we handle this mostly automatically, but still this triplication (is this a word?) doesn't make too much sense. > 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. Sounds good to me. Cheers, gregor  https://metacpan.org/release/Foo-Bar -- .''`. https://info.comodo.priv.at -- Debian Developer https://www.debian.org : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D 85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06 `. `' Member VIBE!AT & SPI Inc. -- Supporter Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Soluna Samay: Sing Out Loud
Description: Digital Signature