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

Re: RFC: Description text in packages

On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 08:34:33AM -0800, Christopher Stone wrote:
> Putting feature lists in descriptions is stupid.  Obviously, you would
> have to update the description after each release which is stupid.  It
> is most likely that feature lists in descriptions are simply cut &
> paste jobs from an upstream web site which is stupid.

I happen to think that it's reasonable to do this in some
circumstances -- where the upstream website author has written a good,
concise description of the package, and is clearly more familiar with
the package than the Fedora maintainer.  And in any case, what is
wrong with feature lists (even if they need to be updated)?  If
someone has gone to the effort of doing 'yum info package' then it's
quite likely they're interested in the features of that package.


Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat  http://et.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my OCaml programming blog: http://camltastic.blogspot.com/
Fedora now supports 68 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#)

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