reopen 382477 thanks On Sat, 2006-11-11 at 22:27 +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: > This is why the DevRef recommends not exceeding 20 lines. So, the > DevRef is right telling so and lintian is right warning maintainers > about this. > If you really think that you have too much information that you *must* > exceed 20 lines and take the risk of your users not reading your > debconf template, then use a lintian override... But, really, please > consider whether debconf is really the place to write down huge > documentation for your users. If that's the reasoning, then I still think the DevRef is wrong: the DevRef lists a technical reasoning: a tool is unable to cope with it. This seems simply not true. I largely agree with your reasoning, but you should then put *that* reasoning in the devref (too long descriptions are not desired because they do not get read), and not some other one. As I said I agree that there's a good point in saying people should keep descriptions to a minimum. In this specific case I inherited a debconf template from the previous maintainer, and it listed a step-by-step plan to resolve a situation. Due to the formatting this exceeded 20 lines. I've now shortened it to be under 20 lines due to some less details in the plan. I'm not sure though that this is the best way: I've now made things less clear for users. This because I thought there was some kind of actual fixed limit. > As a consequence, I close this bug report because I see nothing to do > in the DevRef about this. Reopening as per above. Thijs
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part