On Sun, Aug 12, 2001 at 08:19:37PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Uh, you're using musts for the wrong thing again. Packages aren't going
> to get thrown out of the distro because of dodgy descriptions, even if
> they're absolutely, unambiguously in the wrong.
Where did I say package descriptions "MUST" be accurate?
Please re-read my mail.
I said they "MUST" not duplicate the short description of another
package, and that they "MUST" not exceed 80 characters total.
This kind of thing is utterly trivial to fix, and if some Release
Manager^W^Wperson throws out a package instead of fixing this, having
someone else fix it, or granting it immunity, he needs his head
examined.
Since you're fond of statistics, here are some for woody/main/i386:
$ grep '^Description:' Packages | wc -l
6126
$ grep '^Description:' Packages | sort | uniq | wc -l
5848
$ grep '^Description:' Packages | fold -w 93 | wc -l
6126
This means we already have 100% compliance on my "MUST" about short
descriptions not exceeding 80 characters ("Description: " is 13
characters long).
uniq -d reveals 201 descriptions that account for 278 total duplicates.
278 of 6126 is ~4.53% of the packages, which indicates a compliance rate
of over 95%.
Would that all the "musts" we actually *have* in policy could claim such
success...
--
G. Branden Robinson | Somebody once asked me if I thought
Debian GNU/Linux | sex was dirty. I said, "It is if
branden@debian.org | you're doing it right."
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Woody Allen
Attachment:
pgp0yDm3OHI5n.pgp
Description: PGP signature