Hello Andreas! I can not go into the technical details of this - it is beyond how much I can commit now. And obviously you have to strike a balance between the effort spent on this and its usefulness.
* I think I can live with only one reference per package. But this seems to be a rather limited solution to me. Any reference per package would be natural for my judgement. * Allowing multiple would /invite/ multiple references - as in many of my packages, which may be useful. After all upstream must have chosen those references for a reason. Ranking them according to upstream's ranking also seems like a good idea. Thank you for improving the system to hold reference information! Best regards, Laszlo On 21/02/12 16:50, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 09:58:27AM -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: >>>> For the task pages, you can indeed take the first or the last entry >>> I would like to drop the injection of references inside the tasks pages >>> at all in favour of debian/upstream. >> >> IMHO it is well worth keeping references visible in task pages > > Sorry, yes, for sure - it is rather explicitely intended. I want to get > rid of the (duplication) of information inside tasks _files_ and use the > way debian/upstream -> UDD -> tasks pages. > >> yes yes and yes -- I was probably not clear -- we are after >> autogenerated list as well, I just thought that having a >> complimentary generated "ultimate" .bib could be of use as well. > > OK, no problem with this. If we have invented means to create a dynamic > database getting a fixed one in addition is probably very cheap. > > Kind regards > > Andreas. > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
