Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on May 27, 2024. It is now read-only.

Spec: Define "DEP5" #30

Closed
carmenbianca opened this issue May 28, 2019 · 5 comments
Closed

Spec: Define "DEP5" #30

carmenbianca opened this issue May 28, 2019 · 5 comments

Comments

@carmenbianca
Copy link
Member

Thread: #23 (comment)

@silverhook @carmenbianca

@silverhook
Copy link
Collaborator

silverhook commented May 31, 2019

To summarise, the suggestion was:

DEP5 File --- `.reuse/dep5` file, which apart from its filename and location, follows the
definition of [Machine-readable `debian/copyright` file, Version 1.0](https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/)

To which the concern was that DEP5 has some relevant differences to SPDX, most relevantly in some license names, so for REUSE a more “SPDX flavour” of DEP5 would be needed.

Which may mean we would need to define a new file format for this use which would be basically DEP5, but with SPDX Short Identifiers instead of Debian’s.

@carmenbianca
Copy link
Member Author

I think instead of defining "DEP5 File", it makes more sense to define "DEP5".

So perhaps something simple like:

DEP5 - Machine-readable debian/copyright file, Version 1.0. Where the REUSE Specification and DEP5 state different things, the REUSE Specification takes precedence.

It may be nice to state what those different things are, but they are evident from the spec, and I don't really want to repeat myself.

@silverhook
Copy link
Collaborator

I think this approach is an elegant solution, yes.

Perhaps it would make sense to explicitly state that SPDX takes precedence over DEP5, because that is basically where REUSE clashes with DEP5.

@mxmehl
Copy link
Member

mxmehl commented Jun 21, 2019

I agree, for the spec that's a nice solution to prevent repeating ourselves. I we wanted to add this to the FAQ, we should link to resources where such differences are explained.

@carmenbianca
Copy link
Member Author

Closed by 8b5ca93

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants