[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Behaviour for missing homepage field in prospective packages

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:22:53AM -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> Thanks for all the work!  regarding homepage: although probably 99% of
> package have such one, some, theoretically, might  not -- just a
> download folder at minimum.  So, should then those be pointed to as the
> 'homepage'?

I used to mention the download folder in those rare cases.  While I
actually would not regard this as a real homepage I was leaded by the
idea that we should provide any link to the project we intend to
package (and not force the interested user to Google for the thing).

If the visitor simply finds a download folder at a random ftp server
as "Homepage" he is probably sane enough that there is no such thing
like a real homepage but he is not left alone with searching the net
(which is specifically hard in exactly these cases).

This thoughts leaded me to decide to make a homepage mandatory to
list the project in a paragraph.  If not it is ignored.  (I agree that
this should be documented if we decide to keep this behaviour.) 

Kind regards



Reply to: