* Andrey Rahmatullin , 2014-11-23, 18:38:
Ref: policy 3.4.2
Lintian should probably refer to DevRef§6.2.3 instead.
Basing an E tag on just DevRef sounds strange.
The tag (description-synopsis-is-duplicated) currently has:
Severity: important
Certainty: certain
Certainty is about right, bu
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 06:16:19PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> >The current practice is to not repeat the synopsis and this is enforced by
> >lintian since 2002, with an E tag:
> [...]
> > Ref: policy 3.4.2
>
> Lintian should probably refer to DevRef§6.2.3 instead.
Basing an E tag on just DevRef
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 12:22:19PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 10:55:44AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > triggered by #209693, the question is, if the long description should
> > be understandable on its own, or together with the short description.
> >
> > Desc
* Andrey Rahmatullin , 2014-11-22, 12:22:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 10:55:44AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
lintian on the other hand does check, if the short description is
repeated in the long description.
The current practise is that the short description should a nominal
phrase (DevRef§6.2.
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 10:55:44AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> triggered by #209693, the question is, if the long description should
> be understandable on its own, or together with the short description.
>
> Description: Documentation for an array processing package for Python
> This
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 11:02:17PM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 10:50:41AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I believe package management utilities are allowed to omit the short
> > description in favor of the long one for interface considerations.
>
> Why, though? Wh
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 11:02:17PM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 10:50:41AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I believe package management utilities are allowed to omit the short
> > description in favor of the long one for interface considerations.
>
> Why, though? Wh
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 10:50:41AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I believe package management utilities are allowed to omit the short
> description in favor of the long one for interface considerations.
Why, though? What good does it do? The long description is already
long (hence the name),
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 10:55:44AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 3.6.1.0
> Severity: wishlist
>
> triggered by #209693, the question is, if the long description should
> be understandable on its own, or together with the short description.
>
> Description: D
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.6.1.0
Severity: wishlist
triggered by #209693, the question is, if the long description should
be understandable on its own, or together with the short description.
Description: Documentation for an array processing package for Python
This package contai
10 matches
Mail list logo