RFC: fix summary text for lots of packages

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 11:47 AM, James Antill <james at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-11-20 at 14:33 +0000, Richard Hughes wrote:
>> The packaging guidelines have a single sentence on package summaries:
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Summary_and_description
>>
>> "The summary should be a short and concise description of the package"
>>
>> Broken packages are a problem as PackageKit shows the summary first (in
>> bold) in preference to the package name. This is by design.
>
>  What is the rationale for this design? Just a guess that it's better?
>
>> Quite a lot of packages have summary text that is overly verbose, and
>> this makes the GUI and output from pkcon look rubbish.
>>
>> For instance, I've filed
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472365 where the oggconvert
>> package has a summary of:
>>
>> "A simple GNOME application that converts media files to Free formats"
>>
>> First, we don't need to say it's an application, not that it's GNOME
>> specific. Surely something like this would be better:
>>
>> "Simple media converter"
>> or
>> "Simple conversion to free media formats"
>> or
>> "Simple media converter using free formats"
>
>  Why is "simple" a useful word, but GNOME isn't? For someone using a
> GNOME desktop I could see the later being much more helpful.
>  Also, as someone else mentioned:

Well a user may want a simple tool, as opposed to an advanced tool.
And for said user, Gnome may be irrelevant.

Also, uses GTK doesn't necessarily mean Gnome. However, if a package
is going to pull in Gnome libs, would be nice to know that in the
summary.


-- 
Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin
( www.pembo13.com )