Re: Bug#468183: ITP: monkey -- small webserver based on the HTTP/1.1 protocol
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Bug#468183: ITP: monkey -- small webserver based on the HTTP/1.1 protocol
- From: Steve Langasek <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 14:02:34 -0800
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20080301220234.GB23489@dario.dodds.net>
- Mail-followup-to: email@example.com
- In-reply-to: <1204285285.9659.861.camel@petrie>
- References: <20080227145137.GD30494@millhouse.schmalenegger.com> <20080227185508.GF3614@sliepen.org> <20080229004741.GB13899@cajita.gateway.2wire.net> <1204250559.9659.824.camel@petrie> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <1204285285.9659.861.camel@petrie>
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 05:41:25AM -0600, William Pitcock wrote:
> > > Package descriptions should stick to positive aspects of the package,
> > > and not try to draw comparisons towards other packages. IMO.
> > A package description is intended for the administrator to choose which of
> > a set of alternatives to install. A comparison to others, or being open
> > about possible limitations, are very helpful to make this decision.
> Use debtags for that.
The description should describe the package (the program) to a user
(system administrator) who has never met it before so that they have
enough information to decide whether they want to install it. This
description should not just be copied verbatim from the program's
> > > It seems to me as if you are trying to get people to justify the
> > > packages they want to work on.
> > Yes, and that's very desirable.
> Telling people to go away because you don't want to QA their package is
> not desirable at all.
Having a poorly QAed OS because not hurting people's feelings takes is more
important than making sound technical decisions is less desirable.
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/