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

Re: homepage in description

Scripsit Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo <fenio@o2.pl>

> What about changing policy to demand Homepage in packages' description?

It would be too crude a policy. Giving a URL in the description is
fine and well if the URL gives me information that can help me decide
if this is a package I want. However, a URL that just leads to a
couple of ungrammatical sentences saying the same as the package
description, plus a defunct .tar.gz link is not helpful and best
omitted. If policy *required* maintainers to include the latter, the
effect would be that users would waste time following a link that
provided no useful information anyway.

Judging the usefulness of an upstream URL is best left as a matter in
which the maintainer has some discretion. If you don't agree with the
maintainer's judgement, by all means file (minor or wishlist) bugs.
But we should not make it an RC bug not to point to an uninformative
upstream website.

Henning Makholm                             "... and that Greek, Thucydides"

Reply to: