On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 06:41:21PM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > Johannes Rohr wrote: > > I'd say that writing a meaningful package description is certainly the > > duty of the individual package maintainer. A package maintainer should > > usually have an idea of what his/her package is good for, while Javier > > would probably have to spend a lot more time to figure that out, at > > least for lesser known packages. > > However, not providing a better description will (likely) not get > anything done. First, my guess is that it will be more effective than seem to imply. Second, pointing out bugs without fixes is certainly what the bug tracking system facilitates. > > I don't think that filing a bug saying that "Your extended package > > description does not meet Debian policy requirements. Please consider > > writing 4-5 lines to give sysadmins an idea what your package can do > > for them." means asking too much from a Debian maintainer. > > You don't. But I can't help but think that there are a lot of > obvious maintainer's duties more or less neglected - often by simple > obmission, but sometimes patterns show. Often, as in this case, those lapses in obvious (and documented) maintainer duties, constitute bugs in a package. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something in your argument here. Regards, Mako -- Benj. Mako Hill mako@debian.org http://mako.yukidoke.org/
Attachment:
pgpZse2XAAX9i.pgp
Description: PGP signature