RFC: fix summary text for lots of packages

[Richard Hughes]

On Sat, 2008-11-22 at 18:56 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> Also your "simple hacky tool" produces a lot of false positives:
>       * acpi    Command-line ACPI client (try to remove ACPI from
> summary)
>       * barcode generates barcodes from text strings
>       * ccid    Generic USB CCID smart card reader driver
>       * contacts        Contacts addressbook
>       * dialog  A utility for creating TTY dialog boxes
> The problem with these packages it not the summary but the generic
> name of the package. This is something we cannot change.

Right, some of those are false positives, but "Contacts addressbook"
could quite easily become "Easy to use address book" -- I guess it's
mainly preference.

> More examples of false positives:
>       * asylum  SDL port of the game Asylum, originally for the

What's so important about SDL? What is the game? What if i've never
played Asylum? Is is a platform game or a shoot-em-up?

>         Archimedes (try to remove the name here: A port of what?)
>       * audit   User space tools for 2.6 kernel auditing
>       * calc    Arbitrary precision arithmetic system and calculator
>       * dia     Diagram drawing program
>       * ed      The GNU line editor
>       * eject   A program that ejects removable media using software
>         control.

"A program that ejects removable media" -- but I agree the others are
false positives.

> I'm not criticizing your script, I just want to point out that it's
> not as many packages as you might think and for others there is
> nothing we can do about it.

You've every right to complain about my script, it is a cheap hack, and
the first (and probably last time) I'll try to contact package
maintainers directly.

Before I sent the emails, I followed all the giudelines people gave me.
For reference, nobody told me before in any of the 200+ posts to include
the FAS username, and I was told to email pkname-owner rather than the
fas owner email address.

If I spammed people; I apologise. As a point of interest, _tons_ of
people have modified spec files in the last 24 hours, so I consider the
activity worthwhile, even if some people are pretty pissed off at me.

Richard.