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

Bug#209444: marked as done (The package description does not follow Debian policy)

Your message dated Wed, 14 Jan 2004 01:18:26 -0600
with message-id <20040114071826.GO11907@cheney.cx>
and subject line The package description does not follow Debian policy 
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 9 Sep 2003 20:11:07 +0000
>From jfs@dat.etsit.upm.es Tue Sep 09 15:10:17 2003
Return-path: <jfs@dat.etsit.upm.es>
Received: from dat.etsit.upm.es [] 
	by master.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 19wooa-00058O-00; Tue, 09 Sep 2003 15:10:16 -0500
Received: (qmail 32679 invoked by uid 1013); 9 Sep 2003 20:10:15 -0000
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 22:10:15 +0200
From: Javier =?iso-8859-1?Q?Fern=E1ndez-Sanguino_Pe=F1a?= <jfs@computer.org>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Cc: jfs@computer.org
Subject: The package description does not follow Debian policy
Message-ID: <20030909201015.GA32672@dat.etsit.upm.es>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_8_27 (

Package: artsbuilder
Version: 4:3.1.2-1
Severity: important
Justification: section 2.3.3

Your package does not comply with the policy as it does not provide
a proper extended descrition. Policy section 2.3.3 states:

     The description should be written so that it gives the system
     administrator enough information to decide whether to install the

Take in account that package descriptions are very important to administrators
to determine wether a package is (or isn't) useful for them and are
used by package frontends in order to implement keyword-based searchs
(samples include command line tools such as 'apt-cache search X'
or 'grep-dctrl -F Description X' or even fancier interfaces such as

If you need help to provide a proper description for your package you
are advised to digest the README/manpages/HTML files provided by the package
or, as a last resort, request help at the debian-devel mailing list.

If this package is being generated from a single source package and 
you already provide a full description in your control file for the
main package, you might want to use it automatically in sub-packages. If this
is the case consider using ${description}, and debian/substvars. 

This report has been automatically generated and the main reason is that
the package has an extended description which is only one line long.


Javier Fernandez-Sanguino

PS: For more information please read the Debian Policy or the thread
at debian-devel started by 
Message-ID: <20030620155309.GA7065@dat.etsit.upm.es>
which is available at

Received: (at 209444-done) by bugs.debian.org; 14 Jan 2004 07:18:28 +0000
>From ccheney@cheney.cx Wed Jan 14 01:18:27 2004
Return-path: <ccheney@cheney.cx>
Received: from 18.64-5-56.reverse.theplanet.com (pico.surpasshosting.com) [] 
	by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1AgfIJ-0001bY-00; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 01:18:27 -0600
Received: from conr-adsl-cheney.txucom.net ([] helo=calc)
	by pico.surpasshosting.com with esmtp (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.24)
	id 1AgfI9-0005zD-Hn; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 01:18:17 -0600
Received: from ccheney by calc with local (Exim 4.30)
	id 1AgfII-0005at-Tv; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 01:18:26 -0600
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 01:18:26 -0600
From: Chris Cheney <ccheney@cheney.cx>
To: 209553-done@bugs.debian.org, 209624-done@bugs.debian.org,
	209654-done@bugs.debian.org, 209677-done@bugs.debian.org,
	209767-done@bugs.debian.org, 209768-done@bugs.debian.org,
	209788-done@bugs.debian.org, 209819-done@bugs.debian.org,
	209828-done@bugs.debian.org, 209842-done@bugs.debian.org,
	209918-done@bugs.debian.org, 209966-done@bugs.debian.org,
	210025-done@bugs.debian.org, 210186-done@bugs.debian.org,
Subject: The package description does not follow Debian policy 
Message-ID: <20040114071826.GO11907@cheney.cx>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0kRkyLZR5zsR9u2P"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - pico.surpasshosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - bugs.debian.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - cheney.cx
Delivered-To: 209444-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_01_13 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on master.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.6 required=4.0 tests=SUSPICIOUS_RECIPS autolearn=no 
X-Spam-Level: **

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

I have fixed the descriptions in kdemultimedia 3.1.5-1.


Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)



Reply to: