On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 09:01:15AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 07:45:07PM +1000, Brian May wrote: > > Perhaps a better approach, if the descriptions must be different, > > would be to add something like (obsolete version), (current version), > > (newly released version), (beta version), (alpha version), or > > (dangerous version) instead. > > Yes, there is a problem (especially in this case) because gcc-3.0 on > i386 is "not default" and gcc-2.95 is "default". One some archs gcc-3.0 > is the default. > > If you used the "new version", "old version" parts, then when gcc-3.1 > comes out, we'll have to do gcc-2.95 and gcc-3.0 uploads just to change > the short description. The fact that Brian's suggestions might not be appropriate doesn't invalidate the entire concept of distinguishing these packages by their short description. They all exist in the archive for a reason, else we'd have only one gcc. What I suggest is that we use the short description, if at all possible within the length limit, to communicate that information. > Doesn't make much sense to me to require short descriptions to be > different, so long as they are descriptive and not ambiguous like > "libfoo-dev: Development files". Likewise, it doesn't make much sense to me to require capitalization of the first letter of every short description. Arguments from personal incredulity are only persuasive to the unintelligent. > Also, clarification such as expressed for the gcc-* case, is better > handled in the long description. That's what it's there for. You mean like this? Package: gcc-3.0 Description: The GNU C compiler. This is the GNU C compiler, a fairly portable optimizing compiler which supports multiple languages. This package includes support for C, C++, and Objective C. Package: gcc-2.95 NOTE: This is not a final release, but taken from the CVS gcc-2_95-branch (dated 20010407). . This is the GNU C compiler, a fairly portable optimizing compiler which supports multiple languages. This package includes support for C, C++, and Objective C. Boy, that sure does clear things up. -- G. Branden Robinson | It doesn't matter what you are Debian GNU/Linux | doing, emacs is always overkill. branden@debian.org | -- Stephen J. Carpenter http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgpYFHJnL3N7I.pgp
Description: PGP signature