Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I wrote up a spec for the
opkg
PURL type, which I think we should use as a root type instead ofopenwrt
(which is currently stubbed out but not further specified in thepackageurl-go
repo, for example). I suggest lettingopenwrt
act as a namespace foropkg
PURLs, which is consistent with what the spec already has forapk
PURLs, as explained inPURL-TYPES.rst
.One potentially contentious detail in my
opkg
PURL spec is the qualifier key I calledset
, which corresponds to whatopkg
calls "repositories". I choseset
as a name for this field rather thatrepository
orrepo
to avoid confusion with therepository_url
field. The "sets" in question, in the case of OpenWrt'sopkg
distribution, includeThe key
set
was chosen by analogy with OpenBSD's "sets" (collections of related packages, with names like "base", "game", "font", etc.). I'm not particularly wedding to this choice, though, and would welcome alternative suggestions.