RFC: fix summary text for lots of packages

[Richard Hughes]

On Thu, 2008-11-20 at 16:12 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-11-20 at 09:56 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > Josh Boyer (jwboyer at gmail.com) said: 
> > > >It would also be a good idea to have a few "shining examples" for people
> > > >to copy when creating new packages. When we've done that, I'll start
> > > >filing bugs.
> > > 
> > > Just file bugs for packages you think are overly verbose.  Offer
> > > alternate summaries in the bug, and a URL to your email for
> > > rationale.
> > 
> > I'm not sure this scales across 5000 packages. So it would be good
> > to have at least *something* in the guidelines.
> 
> Well, the FPG is intentionally lax on %summary's, because we had wanted
> to avoid getting lot in endless discussions on something which is
> technically widely meaningness.

Right, but maybe we could have a soft guideline such as:

* Summary should aim to be less than 8 words

Richard.