Re: On DOAP Files and Pulse

[Shaun McCance <shaunm gnome org>]

> > On Thu, 2009-04-16 at 17:42 -0400, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> >> Are we moving away from the MAINTAINERS file?
> >>
> >> /me doesn't like duplicate information
> >
> > I'm rather ambivalent about this.  I agree that duplicate
> > information sucks.  Pulse can read our MAINTAINERS files
> > just fine, although there are MAINTAINERS files that
> > aren't quite written right.
> 
> MAINTAINERS is a GNOME-only convention.  Lets move to the more generic doap 
> approach.

I thought MAINTAINERS was a GNU convention, but that we had
our own quasi-format for it that we introduced a short while
ago for Mango.

> > On Fri, 2009-04-17 at 10:18 -0400, Dan Winship wrote:
> >> Some examples of additional useful DOAP tags that pulse isn't
> >> (currently) generating but which people might want to add:
> >>
> >>    <download-page
> >> rdf:resource="ftp://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/libsoup/"/>
> >>    <bug-database
> >> rdf:resource="http://bugzilla.gnome.org/browse.cgi?product=libsoup"/>
> >>    <mailing-list
> >> rdf:resource="http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/libsoup-list"/>
> >
> > The templates have mailing-list.  The other two are good
> > suggestions.
> 
> Can you add them to the template please?  The idea being that the template 
> would include everything that maintainers are encouraged to include.

Done.

> > On Fri, 2009-04-17 at 10:18 -0400, Dan Winship wrote:
> >> DOAP has tags for describing source code repos too, but it
> >> doesn't seem to support git. Oops.
> >
> > I don't think there's any reason to put this information
> > in the DOAP files we store in git.  Pulse can generate
> > it.  We do have to do something about the no-git-support
> > thing, of course.  We have a small DOAP extensions file
> > that we're using for Gnome user IDs.  We could define
> > git there.  But really, that belongs upstream.
> 
> I know Pulse can do that automatically, but doap files shipped in tarballs can 
> be useful in other places too.  Like by downstream tools from distributions. 
> Or Google Code Search, etc.

Good point.  What information would we want in shipped
DOAP files?  We certainly don't want maintainers to have
to put lots of computable information in there.  We could
build tarball DOAP files from git DOAP files, plus extra
information we can ascertain.

Some of the things Pulse can do are pretty straightforward,
and we could put that code into a tool in gnome-common or
something.  But some other things can't be done without
hitting the net, like releases.

--
Shaun