svn commit: r476670 - in head/devel: . rubygem-solve

[Adam Weinberger]

On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 3:57 PM Ryan Steinmetz <zi at freebsd.org> wrote:
>
>
> On (08/08/18 23:34), Mathieu Arnold wrote:
> >> > Ryan,
> >> >
> >> > You've just added a number of ports with uninformative pkg-descrs, and
> >> > unhelpful COMMENT strings. These aren't merely formalities. Users
> >> > should be able to read the pkg-descr and understand if it's the right
> >> > package for them, and COMMENT is the first target for searches.
> >> > Please, go back over them and, at the very least, expand the pkg-descr
> >> > files with more information. As a general rule, pkg-descr should NEVER
> >> > be the same text as the COMMENT.
> >>
> >> Adam,
> >>
> >> These are the description strings from authors of the code.  They came from
> >> either rubygems.org and/or the gem source repository.  For example, in the
> >> case of rubygem-solve:
> >>
> >> https://rubygems.org/gems/solve
> >>
> >> https://github.com/berkshelf/solve
> >>
> >> If you have any specific things you would like to see added to any of the
> >> individual ports, please let me know.
> >
> >pkg-descr must contain sentences, something that can be read. It must at
> >least be two lines long, so that it is descriptive enough.  The fact
> >that upstream is crappy does not mean you can put he same crap in the
> >ports tree.  It is your job as committer to make sure that ports conform
> >to our policies and requirements.  If upstream does not provide a better
> >decription, create one, basd on your knowledge of the software.
>
>
> https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/devel/p5-Data-Serializer-Sereal/pkg-descr?revision=401986&view=markup
>
> https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/net/rubygem-epp-client-afnic/pkg-descr?revision=380380&view=markup
>
> https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/net/rubygem-epp-client-smallregistry/pkg-descr?view=markup
>
> https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/head/net/rubygem-epp-client-secdns/pkg-descr?revision=380380&view=markup

Ryan, what exactly is it that you're arguing in favour of here? All I
requested was for you to please add some helpful information in the
descrs where possible. So far you've argued that uninformative descrs
are okay as long as you copied it from someone else, and that
uninformative descrs are okay because you're not the only one who does
it.

I'm trying to get people on board with fixing what's been an ongoing
problem in our ports. You've agreed with the problem, but not the
solution. If you have another solution to terse descrs that's
different from putting more information in descrs, I'm eager to hear
it.

# Adam


-- 
Adam Weinberger
adamw at adamw.org
https://www.adamw.org