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

Re: Homepage-field in description

On 6/15/06, Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> wrote:
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 12:11:32AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> I don't think any part of packages (description or separate field) are
> the correct place for the Homepage field.

Yes, that's because it's an unneeded duplication of what's already
present in /usr/share/doc/*/copyright.  The description is meant to
convey information about where you can find useful things about the
package, not about where you can download a new version.

Really? Are you sure?
Think about somebody wanting to NMU because a bug has a fix in
upstream and the current mainatiner is too busy or MIA. How difficult
is it to get to the upstream? Is REALLY hard, belive me!

What about trying a port on a new arch where is known that some
support for that arch is in the upstream code, but Debian has remained
behind for quite some time because of freeze period or transitions or
whatever. This is not _at_all_ unrealistic.

I have hit this problem numerous times and is real PITA when it happens.
Debian is not upstream and most of the times people look for
applications and hit the debian package page, they realise that is not
the correct place, but how do I get there if at least a homepage is
not provided.

Of course, there may be cases where including the homepage may be
beneficial, but most of the time, it's nothing but adding visual
spam.  If the homepage contains nothing but a blurb and download

That is not so common place. Debian does not (yet) offer the
possibility to see screenshots of an application, the upstream most
probably will have some (if is the case).

I wouldn't like to download a game that has about 200MB and see that
is has crap graphics or it is not the kind of game I expected.

links, why would anyone need it in a description that is supposed to
be _short_?

Please don't be blind and ignore the non-Debian world.

Thus: shouting on people for "forgetting" the Homepage: field is
counterproductive IMHO.

IMHO, your oppinion lacks basic argumentation. There is nothing
couterproductive in adding a link to te Homepage. How hard can that
be? As a developer one knows that info very well and is does not take
more than a few seconds to add this info in the control description

I could say that it is more counterproductive to NOT have that link
and to try to convince people of the benefits of having it there.

"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein

Reply to: