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

Re: Bug#492922: ITP: arpon -- arp handler inspection

Hamish Moffatt <hamish@debian.org> writes:

> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:33:39AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> > Then you've submitted the ITP report incorrectly. That field
> > should be the intended 'Description' field of the package.
> Where's that written? I don't mean to be objectionable, but no such
> requirement is listed in the developer's reference:
> http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/pkgs.html#newpackage

It's in the instructions for WNPP, and in the form asked by 'reportbug'.

    If your request type is ITP (1) or RFP (4) you are asked for a
    short description and then for some information about the package:

    Please briefly describe this package; this should be an
    appropriate short description for the eventual package:


> I think it's more important to submit an ITP early to avoid
> duplicate work than to spend more time perfecting the package
> description.

It needn't be perfect, but it should be the prospective packager's
intended description of the package.

This is important to allow meaningful discussion about the package
before further work is done on it; the synopsis and description are a
large part of the filter someone will use to decide whether to take a
closer look at the ITP.

 \         “I went to the museum where they had all the heads and arms |
  `\      from the statues that are in all the other museums.” —Steven |
_o__)                                                           Wright |
Ben Finney

Reply to: