Re: Requiring DOAP instead of MAINTAINERS file

Am Montag, den 21.01.2008, 23:10 +0100 schrieb Olav Vitters:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 02:26:54PM +0100, Mathias Hasselmann wrote:
> > So let's bring this at some constructive level.
> > 
> > Attached is a script that converts files of this kind, I suggest the
> > name "PROJECT-INFO", into DOAP files. Attached there also is some
> > initial script for converting this file into DOAP.
> In theory this is fine, however it does has some limitations:

> 2. I want every field/option in doap to be in here. Including releases I
>    mean.

Guess install-module would have to do this job, as suggested by Matthias

> 3. Someone has to maintain below script, but hopefully mostly one-off.

RDF also needs some kind of maintenance: Extensions like custom elements
or category tags would need some kind of standardization process to be

> 5. Not related to the format: PROJECT-INFO implies you want this in the
>    repository of some module?

Yes, with that file within the module it is quite trivial to keep
traditional files in sync. This would just be some automake rules.

Don't know a good way for doing that, with the project description
located in another module. Specially if you want to support tools like
git-svn or bzr-svn.

>    This breaks down with [...] the more intense SVN repos changes
>    (when you move /trunk directory).. 

Call me sarcastic, but somehow this is a good thing, considering the
trouble moving branches (instead of merging them) causes.

> 1. I assume I can use some existing DOAP validator when using that
>    directly . This format would have to be checked manually (maintenance)
> 4. It is not as extensible as that Turtle/RDF format (main objection)..
> (6). It still has the discoverability problem (how do you know what fields to
>    use?) But that is not really different from RDF / xml / etc.

Wouter's explanations regarding RDF actually shifted my attitude.
In opposition to other schema's I've seen, RDF schemas really seem to
allow machine readable extensions to the file format. So probably using
RDF in Turtle notation seems like a reasonable compromise.

Mathias Hasselmann <mathias hasselmann gmx de>
Openismus GmbH:
Personal Site:

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]