[#202] propose VIP and NIPKG package formats #318
Conversation
…kage) for common LabVIEW package formats for [package-url#202 package-url#202]
| ----- | ||
| ``nipkg`` for NI Package format packages: | ||
|
|
||
| - The ``namespace`` is the maintainer from the package attributes (optional). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What does it mean for the maintainer to be optional? Is it optional because the maintainer has a default?
If it's optional because it doesn't matter, it shouldn't be included because that creates problems for code that needs to match PURLs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The maintainer is an optional field in the nipkg attributes, so it could be empty. In the pURL spec it should be provided, if present in the nipkg attributes, but otherwise ommitted - hence being optional.
PURL-TYPES.rst
Outdated
| --- | ||
| ``vip`` for VI Package Manager (VIPM) format packages (LabVIEW): | ||
|
|
||
| - The ``namespace`` is the company name from the package attributes (optional). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It doesn't seem like the namespace is used by the native vipm tools (the website makes links like vipm://oglib_numeric), so it probably should not be included here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Updated to remove namespace in commit: c193d21
jkowalleck
changed the title
|
Clarified nipkg namespace attribute inclusion and removed vip namespace, updated PR from master. |
Reserve LabVIEW-related package formats vip / nipkg #202