[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] metadata.dtd: Remove obsolete <natural-name/> element per GLEP 68
From:       Michał Górny <mgorny () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2016-04-30 11:34:08
Message-ID: 20160430133408.14c4b900.mgorny () gentoo ! org
[Download RAW message or body]


On Sat, 30 Apr 2016 02:36:18 -0400
Göktürk Yüksek <gokturk@binghamton.edu> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
> 
> Michał Górny:
> > On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 19:41:06 -0400 Göktürk Yüksek
> > <gokturk@binghamton.edu> wrote:
> >   
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
> >> 
> >> Brian Dolbec:  
> >>> On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 15:39:05 -0400 Göktürk Yüksek 
> >>> <gokturk@binghamton.edu> wrote:
> >>>   
> >>>> --- metadata.dtd | 5 +---- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 
> >>>> deletions(-)
> >>>> 
> >>>> diff --git a/metadata.dtd b/metadata.dtd index
> >>>> 7626a57..b608852 100644 --- a/metadata.dtd +++ b/metadata.dtd
> >>>> @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ <!ATTLIST catmetadata pkgname CDATA "">
> >>>> 
> >>>> <!-- Metadata for a package --> -<!ELEMENT pkgmetadata ( 
> >>>> (maintainer|natural-name|longdescription|slots|use|upstream)*  
> >>>> )> +<!ELEMENT pkgmetadata (   
> >>>> (maintainer|longdescription|slots|use|upstream)* )> <!ATTLIST
> >>>>  pkgmetadata pkgname CDATA ""> <!-- One tag for each
> >>>> maintainer of a package, multiple allowed--> @@ -13,9 +13,6
> >>>> @@ explicit type) for Gentoo maintainers is prohibited. -->
> >>>> <!ATTLIST maintainer type (person|project|unknown)  
> >>>> "unknown">  
> >>>> 
> >>>> -  <!-- Natural name for package, example: LibreOffice (for 
> >>>> app-office/libreoffice) --> -  <!ELEMENT natural-name
> >>>> (#PCDATA)  
> >>>>> - <!-- A long description of the package in freetext-->  
> >>>> <!ELEMENT longdescription (#PCDATA|pkg|cat)* >  
> >>> 
> >>> Isn't this almost obsolete?  it's now xmlschema...  And I hope
> >>> to have the new repoman with it out this weekend :)  
> >> 
> >> Does GLEP 68 explicitly declare metadata.dtd obsolete? I see that
> >> the example metadata.xml on the GLEP is missing DOCTYPE, are we
> >> getting rid of those too?  
> > 
> > No, and I don't know.
> > 
> > metadata.dtd is still required by many tools, and as such it makes 
> > sense to keep it. However, we may want to put some warning that
> > it's not very strict, and allows major structural violations due
> > to technical limitations.
> >   
> After a discussion with ulm on IRC, we agreed that the following makes
> sense: "the format of the metadata is defined in GLEP 68. the syntax
> is defined in metadata.dtd. The xml-schema can be used for stricter
> validation checks." If you have no objections, I will update devmanual
> based on this description.

What is the precise difference between 'format' and 'syntax' here? I'm
no native English speaker, and I don't see any obvious split of
responsibility between the two here, and I'm pretty sure this will be
quite confusing for other people as well.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/>

[Attachment #3 (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]