This commit clarifies that the meaning of the `meta.sourceProvenance`
field is independent of and unaffected by the value of the
`meta.license` field. This is based on the intent of the RFC author
as expressed here:
https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/161098#issuecomment-1081270201
This clarification is added for two reasons:
1. If in the future there should be some disagreement about what
`sourceProvenance` to assign to a package, this may help resolve
the disagreement. Any interpretation of `sourceProvenance` which
is influenced by the `meta.license` is clearly an incorrect
interpretation.
2. If it should turn out that it is impossible to disentangle
`sourceProvenance` from `meta.license`, this would indicate the
need for changes to the `sourceProvenance` scheme. That change
might be as simple as replacing the sentence added by this commit
with some other sentence explaining how the two fields influence
each other.
This commit implements the recommendation made in the paragraph of
this comments which begins with "Please say this explicitly...":
https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/161098#issuecomment-1081309089
We are still using Pandoc’s Markdown parser, which differs from CommonMark spec slightly.
Notably:
- Line breaks in lists behave differently.
- Admonitions do not support the simpler syntax https://github.com/jgm/commonmark-hs/issues/75
- The auto_identifiers uses a different algorithm – I made the previous ones explicit.
- Languages (classes) of code blocks cannot contain whitespace so we have to use “pycon” alias instead of Python “console” as GitHub’s linguist
While at it, I also fixed the following issues:
- ShellSesssion was used
- Removed some pointless docbook tags.
