Re: Package description review (in ITP)

[Ben Finney <ben+debian@benfinney.id.au>]

Frank Lin PIAT <fpiat@klabs.be> writes:

> Shouldn't we suggest/require that the descriptions in ITP bugs
> includes the intended description for the package? (as opposed to a
> mere copy of upstream description)

This has been mentioned a number of times over the years, and it's still
a good idea IMO.

> Current ITP look likes this:
[…]
> > (Include the long description here.)
>
> I suggest to replace the last line with:
>
> > (Include the intended long description of the package here.)

Perhaps be even more explicit:

    (Include the intended long description of the Debian package here.)

> Voilà,
>
> Franklin

Thanks for pursuing this.

-- 
 \        “Odious ideas are not entitled to hide from criticism behind |
  `\          the human shield of their believers' feelings.” —Richard |
_o__)                                                         Stallman |
Ben Finney