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

Bug#139957: period at the end of short description?

>>"Colin" == Colin Walters <walters@debian.org> writes:

 Colin> Hi, this is not a major problem, but I'd like to see a bit more
 Colin> consistency among the package descriptions.  The attached patch should
 Colin> be self-explanatory.  A quick analysis of the Packages file suggests
 Colin> there is already a rough consensus in agreement.

	I formally object to this. Why should the short description
 not be a full sentence? Why are we adding useless bloat to policy?
 This does not seem appropriate for policy anyway (there is no
 technical reason for not including a period, nor has there been any
 justification for doing it this way).  Even if it were justified (I
 fail to see how), policy is not a best practices document.

	Policy is also not a stick to shake at developers after they
 close bugs that you reported on the issue.

	It is equally likely that the better thing to do would be to
 require all short descriptions to have a ending period (indeed, this
 shall be my counter GR).

 Your aim is high and to the right.
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: