Richard Hughes wrote:
The packaging guidelines have a single sentence on package summaries:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Summary_and_description
"The summary should be a short and concise description of the package"
Broken packages are a problem as PackageKit shows the summary first (in
bold) in preference to the package name. This is by design.
Quite a lot of packages have summary text that is overly verbose, and
this makes the GUI and output from pkcon look rubbish.
For instance, I've filed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472365 where the oggconvert
package has a summary of:
"A simple GNOME application that converts media files to Free formats"
First, we don't need to say it's an application, not that it's GNOME
specific. Surely something like this would be better:
"Simple media converter"
or
"Simple conversion to free media formats"
or
"Simple media converter using free formats"
The guidelines also don't say if it should be Title Case or if the
summary should include the application name. If we come to some
guidelines (or working practices) on this email thread, I'll update the
wiki page with more details.
It would also be a good idea to have a few "shining examples" for people
to copy when creating new packages. When we've done that, I'll start
filing bugs.
Thanks,
Richard.
Guidelines? Maybe, but...
If PackageKit has some troubles with displaying long summaries, you
should fill bug against PackageKit not against every package with long
summary
Usually, if I need something, I use yum search keyword and choose what I
will install thx summary, so I prefer useful and descriptive summary
against a few words
btw... oggconvert :
A simple GNOME application that converts media files to Free formats
lets see PackageKit :
System daemon that is a DBUS abstraction layer for package management
its even longer... :)
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
