On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 10:49:13PM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > My argument was based on a matrix lintian error tags <-> > maintainers. There's lintian tags practically "owned" by > maintainers. That's what I meant with patterns. In those cases, > pointing things out directly will help more. In some cases, > description deficiencies may be related to English skills (I'm not a > native speaker myself). In those cases patches can achieve much more > than bugs without patches. I don't think anyone here is arguing that attaching a full description would be equally or less helpful than simply pointing out the problem. We're just saying that it would be useful in and off itself. For those of us that don't have time to write scores of descriptions for packages they are unfamiliar with, mass-filing in some sort of automated or semi-automated fashion is a reasonable way to point out the problem and, in the normal way bugs are fixed, eventually fix the problem as well. Writing and maintaining a package description seems to clearly be the package maintainers job. In reference to Branden's message in this thread, one would hope that the maintainers are also particularly well suited to writing this (i.e., better suited than someone that doesn't know the package). Regards, Mako -- Benj. Mako Hill mako@debian.org http://mako.yukidoke.org/
Attachment:
pgpXJvYadkzEg.pgp
Description: PGP signature