News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Understanding the PURL Specification (Package URL). Parent comment

Re:Understanding the PURL Specification (Package URL) by donenext on Thursday June 05, 2025 @04:42PM (#44195586)
Thats fair. It just seems silly that a spec intended to "uniquely ID a package" supports a type that is the complete opposite of "unique". I guess another way to frame my take is should `generic` be consider a valid PURL? Keep it as a fall back sure, but distinguish between "fully qualified" PURLs and "partial" PURLs.

This then gives tooling a path to prompt users to provide missing context needed to fully qualify the PURL

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Understanding the PURL Specification (Package URL) by pombreda on Thursday June 05, 2025 @05:33PM (#44196010)
> distinguish between "fully qualified" PURLs and "partial" PURLs.

Can you tell a bit more? Not sure I get what you meant

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Understanding the PURL Specification (Package URL) by jessoteric on Thursday June 05, 2025 @05:57PM (#44196168)
That seems like a good idea... hmm.
[ Parent | on HN ]