Bug#694009: qa.debian.org: Please include suite version information in RDF meta data

[Arno Töll]

Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: wishlist

The RDF pages for a package in the BTS contains lots of machine-readable
information about the package. However, it misses the information from the
versions column (i.e. the current version of a package told apart per suite). It would be
super handy to have that information encoded in XML as well.

This should be a fairly simple patch for those of whom the PTS code is not a
complete mystery (like it is for me). Essentially this would mean, that we'd have
a (somewhat) easy readable method to retrieve the most current version of a
package in our suites.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 3.5-trunk-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

[Olivier Berger]

Hi.

Arno Töll <ar...@debian.org> writes:


> The RDF pages for a package in the BTS contains lots of

You mean PTS, right ?

> machine-readable information about the package. However, it misses the
> information from the versions column (i.e. the current version of a
> package told apart per suite). It would be super handy to have that
> information encoded in XML as well.

What kind of use case do you have ? I have thought about adding these
kind of meta-data, but haven't yet tackled the problem.

Do you know an existing ontology that could be used to link this version
information to the existing RDF content ?

I'd suggest a Turtle example (see
http://www-public.telecom-sudparis.eu/~berger_o/weblog/2012/08/29/debian-package-tracking-system-now-produces-rdf-description-of-source-packages/
for details on how to generate one using rapper) for the sake of readability.

>
> This should be a fairly simple patch for those of whom the PTS code is not a
> complete mystery (like it is for me). Essentially this would mean, that we'd have
> a (somewhat) easy readable method to retrieve the most current version of a
> package in our suites.

Depending on the use case, you may be interested in the SOAP interface
of the PTS also : see http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html
for pointers.

Best regards,
--
Olivier BERGER
http://www-public.it-sudparis.eu/~berger_o/ - OpenPGP-Id: 2048R/5819D7E8
Ingenieur Recherche - Dept INF
Institut Mines-Telecom, Telecom SudParis, Evry (France)

[Arno Töll]

On 11/23/2012 12:53 PM, Olivier Berger wrote:
> You mean PTS, right ?

I do, sorry for the confusion :)

>> machine-readable information about the package. However, it misses the
>> information from the versions column (i.e. the current version of a
>> package told apart per suite). It would be super handy to have that
>> information encoded in XML as well.
>
> What kind of use case do you have ? I have thought about adding these
> kind of meta-data, but haven't yet tackled the problem.

I am trying to implement a sanity check for my dput rewrite (#691624)
which makes sure Debian revision uploads match the orig.tar.gz checksum
of the previous upload. To achieve this, I need the most current version
of a package in a branch and (a) checksum for the orig.tar.gz associated
with it. The latter is already in the RDF.

> Do you know an existing ontology that could be used to link this version
> information to the existing RDF content ?

I'm not sure what exactly you are asking me, but if you ask how to
provide the data in question: Your example data in [1] contains this
information and that would be good enough (altough the associated suite
name, e.g. "stable" would be helpful to know):

# pointer to the release in the different suites :
doap:release <apache2_2.2.16−6+squeeze7>, <apache2_2.2.22−11>,
<apache2_2.4.2−2>.

> I'd suggest a Turtle example (see
> http://www-public.telecom-sudparis.eu/~berger_o/weblog/2012/08/29/debian-package-tracking-system-now-produces-rdf-description-of-source-packages/
> for details on how to generate one using rapper) for the sake of readability.

Glad you picked my package by the way :>

> Depending on the use case, you may be interested in the SOAP interface
> of the PTS also : see http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html
> for pointers.

Indeed, I didn't know about the SOAP interface. That one seems to
provide the information I need while it does not provide the other
information about file checksums it seems by reading [2].


Moreover, a SOAP interface would be much easier to implement than
parsing XML.


[1] >
http://www-public.telecom-sudparis.eu/~berger_o/weblog/2012/08/29/debian-package-tracking-system-now-produces-rdf-description-of-source-packages/
[2] http://people.debian.org/~zack/pts/soap/

--
with kind regards,
Arno Töll
IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC
GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D

[Olivier Berger]

Hi.

Olivier Berger <obe...@debian.org> writes:

>
> Do you know an existing ontology that could be used to link this version
> information to the existing RDF content ?
>
> I'd suggest a Turtle example (see
> http://www-public.telecom-sudparis.eu/~berger_o/weblog/2012/08/29/debian-package-tracking-system-now-produces-rdf-description-of-source-packages/
> for details on how to generate one using rapper) for the sake of readability.
>

I've implemented this feature the following way (example for apache2) :

<http://www.debian.org/releases/stable#distribution>
admssw:includedAsset <http://packages.qa.debian.org/apache2#apache2_2.2.16-6+squeeze10> .

<http://www.debian.org/releases/security-stable#distribution>
admssw:includedAsset <http://packages.qa.debian.org/apache2#apache2_2.2.16-6+squeeze10> .

<http://www.debian.org/releases/testing#distribution>
admssw:includedAsset <http://packages.qa.debian.org/apache2#apache2_2.2.22-12> .

<http://www.debian.org/releases/unstable#distribution>
admssw:includedAsset <http://packages.qa.debian.org/apache2#apache2_2.2.22-12> .

<http://www.debian.org/releases/experimental#distribution>
admssw:includedAsset <http://packages.qa.debian.org/apache2#apache2_2.4.2-2> .


For now, admssw:includedAsset seems the perfect fit according to the
specs, at least :
https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/svn/adms_foss/adms_sw_v1.00/adms_sw_v1.00.htm#Software%20Release%20-%20included%20asset

I hope this will suit most people's needs.

The code is in the SVN, pending deployment.

Hope this helps.

Best regards,
--
Olivier BERGER

http://www-public.telecom-sudparis.eu/~berger_o/ - OpenPGP-Id: 2048R/5819D7E8

[Arno Töll]

On 25.02.2013 19:37, Olivier Berger wrote:
> I hope this will suit most people's needs.

It fits mine, thanks for your work! I'm looking forward to have this
code live so that I can write my code parsing it.

[Arno Töll]

On 25.02.2013 19:37, Olivier Berger wrote:

> I hope this will suit most people's needs.

It fits mine, thanks for your work! I'm looking forward to have this
code live so that I can write my code parsing it.

(forwarding to the bug, I reply-failed in my MUA)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Thu, 23 May 2013 19:31:49 +0800
with message-id <CAKTje6GfOhyDgro9ftWscePZ...@mail.gmail.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#694009: qa.debian.org: Please include suite version information in RDF meta data
has caused the Debian Bug report #694009,
regarding qa.debian.org: Please include suite version information in RDF meta data
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


--
694009: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=694009
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems