Re: identical extended descriptions
Drake Diedrich wrote:
> *This* proposal is to file 200+ bug reports because the package
> descriptions don't duplicate information implicit in package names, package
> sections, and version numbers. Before those 200 bug reports are filed I
> think policy section 2.3.3 should be modified to state that implicit
> information must be duplicated in the description.
So, since one can *clearly* tell exactly what a package is by simply
reading the package name, all descriptions are completly irrevelant and
might as well be removed.
Fine. Go make a proposal to that end. As it is, you're spewing nonsense
that is not backed up by policy.
> I think that duplication
> would be misplaced, since it's common to all section lib/ and -dev packages,
No it isn't. It's common to lib and dev packages with lazy maintainers.
None of *my* lib and dev packages have this problem. Nor do a small
majority of lib and dev packages.
> Pull your horns in Manoj. Joey followed standard practice before filing
> massive automated bug reports. You've raised some objections.
Manoj raised no objections to me filing bug reports.
--
see shy jo
Reply to: