Allegedly, on or about 09 February 2017, Kevin Fenzi sent:
Unfortunately, it's kind of subjective what a good summary /
description would be. Perhaps the guideline could say "Describe what
the package is as if to someone who had no idea what it was" ?
But in some cases there's packages like libraries where the audience
for the package already should be someone who knows pretty well what
I'd suggest that *all* packages need clear descriptions, and all updates
need adequate explanations.
When I do a yum update, I do try to research the packages it wants to
update, first. Some of which you just can't find any useful information
Likewise, I might do a yum search on a topic, and get a plethora of
oddball results that I can't work out whether they'd be useful, or
Anyhow, I'd suggest:
1) file a bug on nitrokey politely saying that the description and
summary are not useful and ask them to redo them.
I'd be filing umpteen of the damn things, If I had the perseverance to
go through bugzilla (it's not quick or easy). Hence the comment about
it ought to be be more automatic. And as I said, I just picked that one
as a random example.
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp
Linux 3.9.10-100.fc17.x86_64 #1 SMP Sun Jul 14 01:31:27 UTC 2013 x86_64
Boilerplate: All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is
no point trying to privately email me, I only get to see the messages
posted to the mailing list.
Just because nobody complains, it doesn't mean that all parachutes are