Hi Praveen, Having seen the unedifying thread on pkg-javascript I can see why you might be rather defensive on this subject, but this thread was intended as constructive criticism. The packages do actually need a long description to make it through the NEW queue, so this is really just about when that gets added. If that's done before submitting the ITP then it gives a better impression, and would also encourage people to suggest improvements. I've responded to a few of these ITPs and have found the responses I've received suggest that you've chosen your recruits well, so it strikes me as a shame that they are underselling themselves by submitting ITPs in this state. It would probably help if they also wrote a line or two after the descriptions about why they are packaging the package and/or any concerns they might have about the wording or packaging. Doing that is much more likely to attract useful suggestions than sending bare ITPs with only (often rather dubious) short descriptions. I'm tempted to respond to each of these people's first ITP with some suggestions, but you are much better placed to pass on advice to them, so I think it would be better if you did it. Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature