Nils Gillmann <niaster...@grrlz.net> skribis: > Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> writes:
[...] >>> + (description "GNUnet is a framework for secure, distributed, >>> peer-to-peer >>> +networking. The high-level goal is to provide a strong foundation of free >>> +software for a global, distributed network which provides security and >>> +privacy. GNUnet in that sense aims to replace the current internet >>> protocol >>> +stack. Along with an application for secure publication of files, it has >>> +grown to include all kinds of basic applications for the foundation of a >>> GNU >>> +internet. >>> + >>> +gnunet-0.10.1 is the last stable release candidate, however for >>> +development purposes and keeping up with latest changes, the SVN version >>> +might be preferable until a new version is released.") >> >> Do we have a consensus on how to handle this sort of "Guix metadata"? > > Which metadata do you refer to here? > > The description is good with the GNUnet project, talked about it > with others involved in GNUnet. It’s not that simple. ;-) Descriptions for GNU packages are maintained in a canonical place outside of Guix (they’re also use for other purposes, such as gnu.org), and we synchronize from them. ‘guix lint -c gnu-description’ reports differences with said database. Thus, in general, we should keep the canonical synopsis/description for GNU packages, and email bug-w...@gnu.org if we think a synopsis/description must be changed. Another comment: should we call this package “gnunet-next”, like we did for “guile-next”? This would make it clear that it’s a development snapshot. (Sorry for not coming up with that idea earlier.) WDYT? Thanks, Ludo’.
