Re: Done (was Re: [mass bug filing?] Short descriptions being used as long descriptions and other policy violations)
On Wed, 10 Sep 2003, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Unfortunately, your automated reports are based on something which I
> consider a fallacy, namely, that an extended description having a
> single line can *never* provide enough information for the
> administrator to decide whether to install the package.
To be honest I just raised my hand to simply close the bug against
fortunes-de which had also a single line extended description. At a second
thought I found out that an additional sentence does not really harm and
in fact is more user friendly than before. Thus I closed the bug by
a new upload. ;-)
On the other hand I have at least two critics to the mass bug filing:
- At least the bug against fortunes-de was filed against a not excisting
package version (0.9-1) where the existing packages were (0.6-1/main,
0.10/testing, 0.11/unstable - in testing since yesterday)
Perhaps some packages changed their long description since the last
'apt-get update' of the bug reporter.
- I would regard this kind of bugs as "important". They could only be
important if the reporter would have checked each single description
and found out that it *really* does not provide not enough information.
This can't be guessed by the fact that the description has one
single line.
Kind regards
Andreas.
Reply to: