apk: define arch=source qualifier

[gernot-h]

This proposes a similar approach for Alpine to what we agreed on for Debian in #57.

Thanks for reviewing, let me know what you think and if you need an additional issue for it!

[gernot-h]

@Foxboron, as you contributed apk, I would also be interested in your opinion.

[Foxboron]

I've read the Debian discussion and I don't think I agree with lamby and would prefer having a src qualifier to go along with pkg, but considering this was decided in 2021 I don't think my opinion matters on this.

Generally I think overloading the arch field is a mistake that is making this spec complicated.

[gernot-h]

Thanks, @Foxboron, for your opinion! Apart from the how we express this, you agree that it actually makes sense if we define a way to specify package sources and also use abuild srcpkg as reference, right?

[Foxboron]

Apart from the how we express this, you agree that it actually makes sense if we define a way to specify package sources and also use abuild srcpkg as reference, right?

Yes

[gernot-h]

Is there anything I can do to complete or improve this PR?

[gernot-h]

@pombredanne @stevespringett, as you both engaged intensively in my former arch=source PR for Debian, would you mind having a look into this one, too? TIA!

[pombredanne]

@gernot-h Thanks for the patience! And I am sorry for the pain... but after the merge of PR #514, PURL tests and defs are now defined in new JSON schemas 👼 😇 😁 :

• See Refine Purl type schema #514

With the new approach... this PR needs to be updated. Sorry for the churn. ❤️

[gernot-h]

@gernot-h Thanks for the patience! And I am sorry for the pain... but after the merge of PR #514, PURL tests and defs are now defined in new JSON schemas 👼 😇 😁 :

* See  [Refine Purl type schema #514](https://github.com/package-url/purl-spec/pull/514)

With the new approach... this PR needs to be updated. Sorry for the churn. ❤️

Thanks for the heads-up, @pombredanne! Sorry that I didn't answer earlier! I will look into it in September after the vacation period!

[gernot-h]

Sorry for the delay, @pombredanne! But I adapted my changes to the new schemas now. I hope I got it right!