On Mon, 2008-09-15 at 13:53 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 14.09.2008 15:35, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > > On Sun, 2008-09-14 at 10:36 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >> Yes, I know, enlightenment is designed for small machines and quite > >> fast > >> on them. But those things I quoted and other sections in the > >> description > >> sound more like advertising than a proper description. Up to a > >> specific > >> point that's okay IMHO, but here the packager IMHO shoot way over the > >> top. > > Wow. That is indeed too much information. :) I'm not sure how we should > > "guideline" that, other than something like: > > > > == Descriptions == > > Your package description should contain useful data about the package, > > and answer the question "what is this and what does it do?". In general, > > the description should not exceed 10 lines or so. Try not to put too > > much here, this isn't an epic novel, it's just a package description. > > Also, there is no real need to "advertise" the package here, so > > statements like "this is the best perl module that has ever been created > > by humans", while possibly accurate, are not terribly useful in > > answering the question "what is this and what does it do?". +1 > Sounds good. Not sure, but maybe it's possible to write it a bit shorter Agreed. Shorter would be better. Futhermore, I'd like to see some words added aiming at use of non-self-explanatory acronyms/names and redundant wording. I am getting the creeps when reading descriptions similar to "Hawaii, the Moscow-daemon for Tokio, a free open-source implemention of PROZL/RKNR for GNIZL implemented by Dr. J.Doe at IRTX in Nutbush-City/TX." Everything in Fedora is supposed to be "open source" ... who implemented it and where is non-interesting ... Hawaii, Moscow, Tokio etc. don't tell much to anybody, who aren't already familiar with any of these. Ralf -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
