Re: Using 'Source:' in setup.ini (was Re: [PATCH setup v2] add --build-depend option)

Jon Turney via Cygwin-apps writes:
[…]
> This syntax has been accepted by setup for a long time, but we've
> never made the switch to using it.
>
> Last time I raised this, there were some vague concerns, I think
> around ensuring other tools could extract the data they want from the
> manifest in a single-pass (which is not guaranteed, but perhaps could
> be by ordering packages correctly).

Compatibility with existing tooling is always a concern and there will
unavoidably be some that just don't understand this syntax until they
get updated.  But I think emitting the source package before any of its
productions should resolve any dependency problems in single-pass
parsers (like ordering the versions in a certain way did for another
such problem).  A transition period where both forms are emitted might
be advisable as well.

However what bugs me about his particular syntax is using the same word
for different things, just distinguished by capital and lowercase
initial (and I'm used to that sort of thing…).  Could we use "srcpkg"
instead?  Given that the whole thing wasn't used until now we could
still change it?  In fact given the current description of the "Source:"
key we probably should rename the key if we are going to have a
transition period with both items present.


Regards,
Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

SD adaptation for Waldorf rackAttack V1.04R1:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfSDada